|
|
Posted by Ben C on 05/30/07 09:16
On 2007-05-30, dorayme <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> In article <slrnf5q9rj.bm2.spamspam@bowser.marioworld>,
> Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
>
>> On 2007-05-29, dorayme <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
[...]
>> > Is FF different on Windows cf to Mac? I have so far been
>> > supposing not, thinking that I would have heard by now surely?
>>
>> I doubt it, but what did you mean by a "[non-]_empty_" line? A line
>> containing nothing but one line-height's worth of space is what a lone
>> <br> gives me on my Linux version of FF.
>>
>> e.g.
>>
>> <style type="text/css">
>> div { font-size: xx-large; background-color: pink }
>> </style>
>> ...
>> <body>
>> <div>
>> <br>
>> </div>
>> </body>
>
> I just meant that when one puts in a <br> after a short bit of
> text which continues after the <br> and can be seen as say three
> lines of text in a div that is suitably width limited, the three
> lines are all full of text, none are empty of text. There is no
> empty line.
I see, yes that's expected behaviour and I'd be surprised if FF did
anything different on any platform.
> But, I suppose, come to think about it, JK was meaning something very
> specific about a _lone_ <br>, not merely _one_ <br>. Perhaps I got the
> context wrong?
I don't know but I think people were getting the impression there might
be some variance between FF on different platforms in the handling of
<br>. But we have no evidence of any such phenomenon.
> While I am here, both FF and Safari pile up empty <br>s according
> to their number. I feintly recall it being said it was not
> certain how browsers behaved in this respect.
I remember reading that somewhere but can't now find it.
> Alas, they seem to behave as expected thus probably aiding and
> abetting the poor practice of using these things for layout.
And yes they do usually behave as people deprecatably expect (lots of
empty lines) unfortunately.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|