Michael writes: > In my opinion this > needs to be an all-or-nothing decision: > > 1. Fixed-width text with no special syntax > 2. Reflowed text with some simple flavor of markdown for styling In #1 above is the idea that there would be no wrapping and any text that went over the width limit would be truncated? I can see that being a bad user experience if someone's device does not conform easily to the size that is chosen. It is also annoying to enforce. A perfectly fine document would not be readable because their lines go to 60 instead of 45? I am fine with a fixed width, but only if wrapping or reflowing is available and declarable by the content author. - - - In #2 is reflowed what we are aiming for or is wrapped what we are aiming for? Both terms have been used during the ongoing conversation and I have lost track of which one people are preferring and how each person defines them. Example: In this example I am writing a long line and then a newline and a shorter line. Reflow (ignores whitespace beyond single spaces): In this example I am writing a long line and then a newline and a shorter line. Wrap (recognizes whitespace and just wraps the long line): In this example I am writing a long line and then a newline and a shorter line. - - - I am definitely still open to the idea of a simple markdown flavor, which would potentially make some of this conversation moot. That again ups the client complexity a good amount though so it would have to be **very** simple. - - - Tomasino writes: > I can't believe how simple that is. A leading space for fixed content is > ridiculously simple. I love it. Right? Nice and easy. Given that fixed content will likely be more rare than wrapped or flowed content it seems like an elegant solution. --? Sent with https://mailfence.com Secure and private email
---
Previous in thread (37 of 148): 🗣️ Michael Lazar (lazar.michael22 (a) gmail.com)
Next in thread (39 of 148): 🗣️ Sean Conner (sean (a) conman.org)