[whatwg] [br] element should not be a line break
ian at hixie.ch
Mon May 16 17:18:35 PDT 2011
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Christoph Päper wrote:
> Ian Hickson (2010-12-07):
> > On Thu, 26 Aug 2010, Christoph Päper wrote:
> >> However, I believe the underlying problem is simply that “line break”
> >> is (too) often used and understood as a synonym for “new line”, at
> >> least by non-native speakers. Speaking of breaks on line or paragraph
> >> level therefore makes more sense to me.
> > I don't really understand the difference.
> Here comes a *line break*
> that always means a visual *new line*
> like here, whereas a *break on line level* // may look differently
> – and may actually be rendered with orthographic possibilities (dashes, parentheses etc.) instead of markup, when they’re textual content, not structure.
I still don't understand what you mean here.
> >>> (A "minor logical break inside a paragraph" is not generally
> >>> represented by a line break, at least not in any typographic
> >>> conventions I've seen; usually, in my experience, those are denoted
> >>> either using ellipses, em-dashes, or parentheses.)
> >> That’s true for real paragraphs, but not for most “non-paragraphic”
> >> texts, e.g. addresses.
> > The lines in an address are separate "oral lines", not "minor logical
> > breaks inside a pragraph".
> Addresses (with multpile lines) are a concept native to written, not to
> spoken language.
Certainly addresses are, for their intended purpose, always written down,
but that doesn't mean they're never read out. But I don't see how this
affects this discussion.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg