Selector for content?/code in monospaced font
in [CSS]
|
Prev: Need some help with a styles page
Next: Newbie question
From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn on 19 Feb 2010 06:12 Jukka K. Korpela wrote: [Fixed quotation] > 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 don't care what you asked for. You made a statement, and I provided yet another example that disproved it. > I pointed that your statement does not make sense. And I showed that it does. > The example that you now gave has nothing that could sensibly > be called "vertically positioned". Yes, it has. > You seem to be trying to make the point that Darin McGrew made but you > are not explaining what you mean, just making noise. You should use a fixed-width font to view it, then it becomes less noise. > I already commented on Darin's message, And you have missed the point in doing so. Besides, it was Gary Peek who introduced "vertical alignment" and provided the example of it. > 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. Irrelevant. > [...] >> 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 had pondered upon this a bit longer, you might have been able to realize that source code may also contain such comments, and this example clearly is a part of source code (noticed the leading `;'s?). > 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. You miss the point again. PointedEars
From: Ed Mullen on 19 Feb 2010 14:44 dorayme wrote: > In article<3hhn9j.dpf.17.1(a)news.alt.net>, > Ed Mullen<ed(a)edmullen.net> wrote: > >> I just thought it was: >> >> 1. ... >> 2. ... >> 3. ... >> 4. ... >> 5. ... >> 6. ...: See point 1. > > This causes me a lot of trouble Ed, I am now locked in an endless > loop. I wish you had not added the very last instruction after > the colon. I am going to have to get a house call from my service > folk. > Oooops! Here: CTRL+BREAK. Sorry about that! -- Ed Mullen http://edmullen.net Consciousness - the annoying time between naps.
From: Ed Mullen on 19 Feb 2010 14:47 Jonathan N. Little wrote: > Ed Mullen wrote: > >> Totally OT: I'm happy, I got a solution to a nagging problem in Windows >> 7! Ooo! More reason to celebrate! >> > > Just one? Oh please tell...it isn't upgrade to XP is it? > LOL. Well. My experience with W7 has generally been just great. It's a big improvement over XP. Although I'm still running that on three systems that aren't "beefy" enough for W7. The problem was with a batch file. They changed the cmd.exe command processor somehow and a file I'd been using in XP for years wouldn't work right on 7. FYI, it's the "Make Multiple Folders" discussed at: http://edmullen.net/utility.php -- Ed Mullen http://edmullen.net Photons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic.
From: Albert Ross on 20 Feb 2010 12:11 On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:34:45 -0600, Ben C <spamspam(a)spam.eggs> wrote: >I'm not very happy with the idea of anything being smaller than itself. My penis does that. (Maybe I should use ems rather than pixels)
From: Chris F.A. Johnson on 20 Feb 2010 14:23
On 2010-02-20, Albert Ross wrote: > On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:34:45 -0600, Ben C <spamspam(a)spam.eggs> wrote: > >>I'm not very happy with the idea of anything being smaller than itself. > > My penis does that. > > (Maybe I should use ems rather than pixels) Use smaller units; it will look more impressive (angstroms, perhaps?). -- Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfajohnson.com> =================================================================== Author: Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress) Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress) |