4 ms·

> Which shouldn't be hard-wrapped in the first place If by "hard-wrapped" you mean having a fixed-style, then all poems, code, emails, ascii-art should be hard

by bmacho 2y ago

> Which shouldn't be hard-wrapped in the first place If by "hard-wrapped" you mean having a fixed-style, then all poems, code, emails, ascii-art should be hard-wrapped, and are hard-wrapped. If not, then I don't have any idea what are you talking about.

throw10920 2y ago
> you mean having a fixed-style This is confusing and meaningless. The only reasonable definition of "hard wrapping" is "you insert linebreaks were not previously present into content in order to fit a specific number of columns", and under that nothing should be hard-wrapped. People never call ASCII art or poems "hard-wrapped", or say that code is "hard-wrapped" when you add natural line breaks at the ends of lines (e.g. "if (cond) {\n" or on web "<p>if (cond) {</p>") because that's not how people use that term. Poems and ASCII-art aren't hard-wrapped by definition because the line-breaks are already present as part of the content itself. For the code and emails, I already conclusively showed why those are bad.
- bmacho 2y ago
  I see. Then what I wrote, still stands, that is: >> There's zero excuse for hard-wrapping - it actively makes the lives of readers worse. Safari is doing the sane and normal thing - soft-wrapping text, because most sane people do not hard-wrap their text, for obvious reasons. > It breaks poems, code, ascii art, emails, man page, and probably much more that I can't think of. The alternative of safari's soft wrapping is not "hard wrapping" (which, since Safari is a display, would be the same as soft wrapping), but not wrapping at all, letting the line to go out. Which would be the right thing for poems, code, ascii art, emails, man pages, letters, any structured text, and probably much more.
  - throw10920 2y ago
    Oh, I misunderstood - you're right, "not wrapping"/"scrolling" is indeed the right option in this case. I forgot that that was an option. My apologies!

by bmacho 2y ago

throw10920 2y ago

> you mean having a fixed-style This is confusing and meaningless. The only reasonable definition of "hard wrapping" is "you insert linebreaks were not previously present into content in order to fit a specific number of columns", and under that nothing should be hard-wrapped. People never call ASCII art or poems "hard-wrapped", or say that code is "hard-wrapped" when you add natural line breaks at the ends of lines (e.g. "if (cond) {\n" or on web "<p>if (cond) {</p>") because that's not how people use that term. Poems and ASCII-art aren't hard-wrapped by definition because the line-breaks are already present as part of the content itself. For the code and emails, I already conclusively showed why those are bad.

bmacho 2y ago
I see. Then what I wrote, still stands, that is: >> There's zero excuse for hard-wrapping - it actively makes the lives of readers worse. Safari is doing the sane and normal thing - soft-wrapping text, because most sane people do not hard-wrap their text, for obvious reasons. > It breaks poems, code, ascii art, emails, man page, and probably much more that I can't think of. The alternative of safari's soft wrapping is not "hard wrapping" (which, since Safari is a display, would be the same as soft wrapping), but not wrapping at all, letting the line to go out. Which would be the right thing for poems, code, ascii art, emails, man pages, letters, any structured text, and probably much more.
- throw10920 2y ago
  Oh, I misunderstood - you're right, "not wrapping"/"scrolling" is indeed the right option in this case. I forgot that that was an option. My apologies!