Selector for content?/code in monospaced font
in [CSS]
|
Prev: Need some help with a styles page
Next: Newbie question
From: Gary Peek on 9 Feb 2010 17:30 Jukka K. Korpela wrote: > Vertical alignment has absolutely nothing to do with monospace vs. other > fonts. You're apparently very confused. Apparently I am! Perhaps I am using the wrong expression. You didn't answer the question from that post. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news(a)netfront.net ---
From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn on 9 Feb 2010 17:38 Jukka K. Korpela wrote: > Gary Peek wrote: >> Jukka K. Korpela wrote: >>> Define "alignment of characters". >> Vertical alignment with the character above it. > > Vertical alignment has absolutely nothing to do with monospace vs. other > fonts. True, he probably meant horizontal alignment of vertically positioned characters, and you knew it. Because the width of a space character is not a integer multiple of another character with a proportional font, it is not possible to achieve that kind of alignment there. The indentation is going to be slightly off always, this makes source code a lot harder to read, and ASCII art like the example table impossible. > You're apparently very confused. You're apparently very irrational. PointedEars
From: Jukka K. Korpela on 9 Feb 2010 18:04 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Jukka K. Korpela wrote: > >> Gary Peek wrote: >>> Jukka K. Korpela wrote: >>>> Define "alignment of characters". >>> Vertical alignment with the character above it. >> >> Vertical alignment has absolutely nothing to do with monospace vs. >> other fonts. > > True, he probably meant horizontal alignment of vertically positioned > characters, and you knew it. No, that does not make any sense, and I had no reason to "know" it. If you don't make a distinction between horizontal and vertical, how are others supposed to make sense of what you write? > Because the width of a space character > is not a integer multiple of another character with a proportional > font, it is not possible to achieve that kind of alignment there. It may, or it may not, but that's irrelevant to everything that has been discussed. > The indentation is going to be slightly off always, this makes source > code a lot harder to read, and ASCII art like the example table > impossible. Pardon, what have you been smoking? There was no discussion of "ASCII art", and the rest of your text does not make sense either. >> You're apparently very confused. > > You're apparently very irrational. I'd rather be irrational than "rational" the way you were here. -- Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn on 10 Feb 2010 08:08 Jukka K. Korpela wrote: > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >> Jukka K. Korpela wrote: >>> Gary Peek wrote: >>>> Jukka K. Korpela wrote: >>>>> Define "alignment of characters". >>>> Vertical alignment with the character above it. >>> Vertical alignment has absolutely nothing to do with monospace vs. >>> other fonts. >> >> True, he probably meant horizontal alignment of vertically positioned ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> characters, and you knew it. > > No, that does not make any sense, and I had no reason to "know" it. Yes, it does make sense. Do you need another example? /* from http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla1.9.2/source/dom/src/threads/nsDOMWorker.cpp */ JSBool nsDOMWorkerFunctions::KillTimeout(JSContext* aCx, JSObject* /* aObj */, uintN aArgc, jsval* aArgv, jsval* /* aRval */) // <--- vertically // ^ positioned | horizontally aligned -------------' Try that with a proportional font. > If you don't make a distinction between horizontal and vertical, > how are others supposed to make sense of what you write? I *am* making the distinction. Your reading skills appear to have degraded considerably in the last years. >> Because the width of a space character is not a integer multiple of >> another character with a proportional font, it is not possible to >> achieve that kind of alignment there. > > It may, or it may not, It is not possible. Try it out, if common sense does not suffice. > but that's irrelevant to everything that has been discussed. No, it is the very point of the discussion. Just not a point you are willing to see, or to accept. >> The indentation is going to be slightly off always, this makes source >> code a lot harder to read, and ASCII art like the example table >> impossible. > > Pardon, what have you been smoking? I was going to ask you the same question. > There was no discussion of "ASCII art", The table in the example is what is called ASCII art: aligning characters in columns (in a fixed-width font) so that the result is a figure. In this case the figure was supposed to be a table. Using a proportional font instead of a fixed-width one to display it, quite literally disfigured it. PointedEars
From: Jukka K. Korpela on 10 Feb 2010 13:32
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >>> True, he probably meant horizontal alignment of vertically >>> positioned > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>> characters, and you knew it. >> >> No, that does not make any sense, and I had no reason to "know" it. > > Yes, it does make sense. Do you need another example? I wasn't asking for an example. I pointed that your statement does not make sense. The example that you now gave has nothing that could sensibly be called "vertically positioned". You seem to be trying to make the point that Darin McGrew made but you are not explaining what you mean, just making noise. I already commented on Darin's message, and I would just add that your example > http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla1.9.2/source/dom/src/threads/nsDOMWorker.cpp does not use the style of starting arguments in the same column position in any consistent manner. It sometimes aligns the continuation of an argument list to the first argument, sometimes to the second one. If you want to be consistent you can put each argument on a line of its own, and then the issue vanishes in a puff of logic: you just indent those lines with the same number of spaces. > The table in the example is what is called ASCII art: aligning > characters in columns (in a fixed-width font) so that the result is a > figure. In this case the figure was supposed to be a table. Using a > proportional font instead of a fixed-width one to display it, quite > literally disfigured it. The discussion was about <code>, which means "computer code". It was not about tables at all, or about ASCII art in any sense. If you have some PREformatted data such as ASCII art or ASCII graph, then it's a matter of <pre> and has nothing to do with <code>. If it happens to be computer code, that's coincidential. There is nothing in the concept of "computer code" that makes monospace rendering necessary or even desirable. -- Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/ |