|
Suddenly I need to care how many "em"s high text in an <h1> tag (and <hN>) needs to be.
I feel like I just stepped off the edge of the earth. Or maybe stumbled on a path wherein if I follow it at the end there's some guy named Ted who holds the keys to the kingdom - all of this arcana that nobody cares about anymore because everyone just uses webkit.
What am I doing? *headdesk*
Edit: Aaand I found this Zuga.net | HTML - Heading elements h1, h2, h3, h4, h5 and h6.[^]
Brilliant!
Real programmers use butterflies
modified 28-Jul-21 17:35pm.
|
|
|
|
|
You are going mad 
"I didn't mention the bats - he'd see them soon enough" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Nice day for it. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
It's always a nice day for mild to moderate insanity.
And think of it this way: if you kill all the psychiatrists, are you no longer crazy?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
If you are into simple typesetting, you should look to the code of TeX from Donald Knuth...
"The only place where Success comes before Work is in the dictionary." Vidal Sassoon, 1928 - 2012
|
|
|
|
|
If my post made it seem like this is something I *like* doing then I wrote it wrong.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Love Tex, but it's old. LyX would be the somewhat modern approach. Or Markup. Markup seems to be the new thing for html typsetting.
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: all of this arcana that nobody cares about anymore because everyone just uses webkit.
Huh, wait a minute, who's using WebKit anymore? I know Apple still use it for their Safari browser, but Chrome (and the new Edge) uses the Chromium engine and given that Chrome is the most used browser, I'd be focusing more on Chrome!
That being said, I spent a while away working on REST APIs and microservices, and some legacy web applications which were put together by 10 year old scaffolding, so coming back to modern development and discovering that everything is now measured in ems and rems, that was a culture shock. Though I think it makes more sense, let's abolish the age of having to get pixel-perfect padding to prevent your whole page from collapsing like a Word document.
|
|
|
|
|
Every e-reader that I'm aware of (I'm not saying all of them mind you) uses webkit.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Say I don't have room to wrap a single world like supercalifragilisticexpialidocious.
In the real world, I'd just find a syllable and then hyphenate.
I don't think I can do that - and i don't think i *should* do that in html and css.
I don't know *what* to do.
What would you do?
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would but it's kind of critical to what I'm doing right now, because how far I read through the document directly corresponds to what can fit on the screen vertically, and that depends on what fits horizontally.
I mean, I guess I can kind of punt this one case if that's what you mean, but it's one of those situations where not making a decision is itself making a decision.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
|
So you'd just split, like in the middle of the word, or at least, as far as the text goes on the screen and then wrap to the next line? I suppose that makes sense.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
--------------------
Well, I'd split on a
space if possible,
but that isn't
always possible,
particularly with
"supercalifragilisti
cexpialidocious",
which exceeds the
line length all on
its own.
--------------------
|
|
|
|
|
That seems very reasonable to me.
As a reader, frankly I could do without a hyphenation character being introduced.
As a developer, I'd see that and think to myself, "you know what - I couldn't have done better".
Win-win. I think you have your solution.
|
|
|
|
|
Clip it. That will punish content creators for using words like supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, and they will stop doing that.
|
|
|
|
|
See if you can find a lightweight dictionary that shows syllables so you can pick a syllable to hyphenate and wrap.
|
|
|
|
|
I just don't have the space for it, and I can't count on being online. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: What would you do?
I'd not wrap at all. Cost-wise the most efficient choice.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
So like, the edges of the word extend of the sides of the page? I'm not sure I can get away with that, since it's for an e-reader, although I wonder if they wouldn't put invisible unicode syllable breaks in long words. I wouldn't want want count on it. Hmmmm.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Supercalifrag...
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
It's for a e-reader for reading books. I can't do that.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Start a dictionary ... you already have a word. I have spelling tables with up to 70,000 entries; you can manage one word?
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
I don't have the space for a dictionary. I just don't. I'm sweating 30kB here 30kB there for my state tables, and then I have 250kB for my default fonts, which i actually have zipped, and then embedded the compressed result into my code as a C array.
But I don't have room left over for much.
Edit: I think I'm just going to hard wrap
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
