On Wednesday 2015-01-28 01:17 -0500, fantasai wrote:
> As dbaron points out, we currently use the block font settings,
> so should stay consistent with this. There's a good reason for
> this: so that tab indentation lines up throughout the block,
> regardless of any font changes.
>
> Note that 'word-spacing' also affects the size of spaces, so
> should probably also be taken into account.
>
> Proposal therefore is that tab stops are calculated as
>
> n*( width of U+0020 plus letter-spacing plus word-spacing)
I think one of the goals of doing this should be that, in at least
some cases, the tab stops line up with text as though 'tab-size'
characters had been skipped.
In order to do that, I think the *first* tab stop should have a
letter-spacing subtracted off (so that it's n-1 letter-spacings
instead of n). Otherwise lines that do use the first tab-stop won't
line up (monospace-grid-wise) with lines that don't, unless the
word-spacing is an integral number of ch.
I'm also skeptical of including word-spacing at all. I'm not
particularly inclined to assume that all words are single letters;
it might, on the other hand, be reasonable to assume that in a
monospace context authors might use a 'word-spacing' in ch, such
that the word spacing would continue to match the monospace grid.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
What I was walling in or walling out,
And to whom I was like to give offense.
- Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)