| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Comments:
<0> if i just ***ign a width to an <img>, does it keep it's proportion?
<0> cool
<0> it does
<1> Windrose: sorry i don't have a real life example of this, but in this text: http://www.benjaminhawkeslewis.com/paragraph.html
<1> would you consider "- and other nonsense like" a paragraph?
<1> (please ignore the fact that those should probably be inline quotes)
<2> majd: same is true for height
<3> webben: I tend to go with the Oxford Reference definition of paragraph - so yes.
<1> OED: "A distinct p***age or section of a text, usually composed of several sentences, dealing with a particular point, a short episode in a narrative, a single piece of direct speech, etc. Paragraphs were formerly indicated by the symbol described in sense 2, and are now usually indicated by a line break, often with an indent at the beginning of the new line."
<1> bother that's too long
<2> Windrose: paste it for me?
<1> 2nd sentence "Paragraphs were formerly indicated by the symbol described in sense 2, and are now usually indicated by a line break, often with an indent at the beginning of the new line."
<2> ah or is that it?
<3> webben: the abbreviated one is "a distinct section of a piece of writing, beginning on a new line"
<1> i don't have Fowler to hand unfortunately
<2> well, I say it's a hole in html :/
<2> if I see a paragraph with a code block _inside_ it in a book, I should be able to reproduce it exactly in HTML
<1> my education FWIW always emphasised "dealing with a particular point"
<3> reisio: but how do you get a code block inside another block? Floating text around it?
<0> how can i vertically align the contents of an <li> ?
<1> hence " -and other nonsense like" is not a paragraph (in that view)
<2> Windrose: just like webben's example, block after block
<1> it sounds, paradoxically enough, like you're operating from a definition based on one aspect of the typography
<3> reisio: but the moment you begin a new block, the former ... stops. Atleast that appears logical to me.
<1> whereas (to blow my own trumpet) my theory explains not only that aspect but other aspects too
<1> as per my Trouble with Nature example
<3> webben: no ... I'm not dealing with typography at all ;)
<1> "beginning on a new line"
<2> but " and other nonsense like" by itself would not be any _paragraph_ I've seen
<4> I hate English.
<1> = typography
<1> reisio: exactly
<2> plus I have a feeling if I asked the author/editor, that they'd say "yes, we were thinking of that as a paragraph with a code block inside it"
<1> the etymology FWIW is:
<3> webben: yes. But there is nothing regarding <blockquote> and <p> that suggest it has to do so. No matter how it is /rendered/, the structure is the same. Consider reading the information out loud.
<1> "paragraph sign, section of text < post-cl***ical Latin paragraphus a short horizontal stroke drawn below the beginning of a line in which a break in the sense occurs (a636 in Isidore), a section of text (13th cent.) < Hellenistic Greek {pi}{alpha}{rho}{gaacu}{gamma}{rho}{alpha}{phi}{omicron}{fsigma}, used to mark the change of persons in a dialogue, or the corresponding parts of a chorus or parabasis "
<1> ah that was made longer by the greek sorry - appears as characters on my screen
<1> a section of text ... used to mark the change of persons in a dialogue, or the corresponding parts of a chorus or parabasis
<1> i think that's closer to my emphasis than yours --- which relies on a feature early paragraphs didn't even have
<1> i think you've been fooled by the markup :)
<1> StoneCypher: perhaps you'd like to chime in with a Style Guide position now?
<3> webben: And I think you have been fooled by the visual appearance :)
<0> <div cl***="greenBorder" style="display: table; height: 400px; _position: relative; overflow: hidden;
<0> talk about hack
<1> Windrose:if paragraphs didn't begin with new lines but were marked up with paragraph signs, my understanding would be intact
<2> majd: the _position is the only problem
<2> and of course cl***= _and_ style= is silly
<1> i.e you could change the visual appearance entirely, and i'd still have a concept of a paragraph
<3> webben: so would mine.
<1> which is why i find the html intepretation so oppressive
<0> reisio, aha
<1> Windrose: yes ... but only because you'd ignore the pesky indents at the starts of some blocks of text after a block quotation and not other
<1> s/other/others
<3> webben: nope; idents don't come into it. They are a part of the visual appearance - NOT the structure.
<1> Windrose: exactly, you're ignoring them ... you have zero explanation for them
<1> you have to accuse the typographers of inconsistency!
<3> webben: it's not a problem doing, say: p { display: inline ; } p:before { content: "paragraph sigh" ; } after all.
<1> Windrose: i'm talking about what would happen if you changed the display in books
<3> webben: I don't /need/ an explanation. I'm talking /structure/ - NOT visual appearance.
<1> not in markup
<1> Windrose: as you well know people use visual styling to denote structure
<1> hence "paragraph signs"
<1> hence "new lines"
<1> hence "punctuation"
<3> webben: in some circumstances, yes. But it has nothing to do with the structure of the information.
<1> what do you mean "nothing to do with"?
<1> what does it have anything to do with?
<1> or should that be
<3> webben: do you really believe a paragraph cease to be a paragraph if rendered without a paragraph sign or new line?
<1> wHat, does! i?t have anything to; do$ with?
<1> Windrose: no of course not - that's the inverse of my point
<1> Windrose: do you really believe "- and other nonsense like" is a paragraph because it occurs on a new line?
<3> webben: good. The rendering of newlines and/or signs is a visual-appearance thing. NOT related to the structure - which is what I am discussing. You can render it with a chicken in front if that communicate "this is a paragraph".
<1> yes --- but if i use chickens ... then i'm consistent with them, not random
<5> hello gentlemen
<3> webben: that'd be good, yes.
<5> webben: i happen to be the legend they were speaking of earlier
<1> but you're conflating chickens (indented text) with ducks (unindented texts) and blaming the difference on typographers
<1> the-drew: hey the-drew!
<5> are you honored to be in my presence
<3> webben: am I? I'm /still/ talking the structure - but your one example looks to be as having inconsistent typography applied. It has nothing to do with the concept of a paragraph.
<6> Windrose you about for a sec?
<5> webben: you know whats special about our conversation, sir?
<1> webben: nope
<5> people think you're talking to yourself
<5> because they all have me ignored for no apparent reason
<1> i know - i'm always doing that
<1> the-drew: shocking
<5> isnt it
<1> the-drew: and the only person who can even see you exist is a mad person talking to himself :)
<5> you act like thats a bad thing
<5> i feed off people like you
<1> Windrose: You're looking at a man waving around chickens and ducks and ***erting he doesn't know the difference.
<1> Windrose: Is it possible that it's you who doesn't know the difference?
<5> after me telling you some of my stories, you wouldnt be the same
<5> i have the power to get inside your head through a text based chat client
<3> webben: yes ... I take that liberty. But he is waving foul, I'm waving canines, to compare. Why they did what they did I don't really care about - the structure is the same.
<5> its almost hannibal lecteresqe
<3> webben: is it possible that /you/ don't?
<3> the-drew: why don't you cut this out, hm?
<4> For some reason, drew entertains some of our regulars. I'm not one of them, so if he starts trying to be funny in my presence, his *** is gone.
<5> my apologies
<6> mattmcc :)
<5> im very mellow today though
<1> Windrose: that i don't what? understand that the waving about of chickens and hens is actually meaningless, even though i see a pattern?
<6> though I don't really understand those channel modes anyhows
<1> Windrose: what are the dogs btw?
<3> webben: it was just an example. We are discussing different things; and I doubt we'll get any farther.
<1> Windrose: I don't think we're discussing different things really.
<1> Windrose: I'm looking around at a load of indented and unindented blocks following quotations.
<1> Windrose: and saying, there must be a logical pattern here ... oh look, there is
<1> because the paragraphs containing the quotations "deal with a single point"
<1> form a logical whole
<1> And you're looking at the same typography and saying, the typographers are wrong.
<2> she's talking about how it is, and you're talking about how it is :)
<1> eh?
<1> and thus by a long and windy road we have arrived at very different ***essments of the sense of XHTML 2.0 allowing blockquote to be nested inside <p> :)
<5> i was hangin out on my patio with a couple buddies last night, things started gettin a little wild, our wives left, so i called up these young guys i knew and told them to bring some ladies over...
<2> she's talking about how it is conceptually, and you're talking about how it is in historical examples
<5> these kids ended up having mushrooms, i turned into a madman
<5> i carved a question mark with my blade right in the middle of my ktichen table
<1> reisio: i'm really talking about both. I think Windrose's concept of a paragraph is wrong.
<2> it's not wrong
<2> it's just not the only concept there is
<5> that my wife spent 3 days working on with the primer or paint thinner or whtaever the hell it is they put on those wood tables
<5> whats the concept--give me the short term
<5> i'll be the mediator
<2> too much info to summarize
<1> reisio: whoa ... what scary relativism is this ;)
<5> basically someone is saying paragraphs should pnly be used for text?
<1> the-drew: no
<5> webben: i dont know the argument but if its against windrose im pretty sure you're wrong
<5> he's almost as knowledgable as i am in web based technologies
<1> the-drew: Not an argument about technologies.
<5> css is a web based technology
<5> you just lost another argument
<1> eh?
<5> go look up the definitions on dictionary.com for those 3 words then come try to make the argument that css is not a "web based technology"
<1> the-drew: the discussion is about whether a long quotation, or a quotation drawing from several paragraphs, can be placed within a containing paragraph
<1> the-drew: er, the discussion is not about css
<1> (yes, i know, apologies to those of you who did come here under the illusion that you'd get to discuss web technologies rather than English grammar ;) )
<1> (feel free to chip in with rants about IE, questions about floating etc etc)
<7> My eyes burn
<8> got semen in them
<7> I've probably slept about 32 hours in the last 48 hours.
<7> Fever and ickiness
<5> a paragraph tag was originally designed to encapsulate a PARAGRAPH, therefore you separate each paragraph with their own p tags, so you dont have to put br's in the document. in which case that DOES involve css you FUC... nevermind im mellow today
<5> not that it cant be used for other methods
<8> rape
<5> dont cry wolf
Return to
#web
or
Go to some related
logs:
jpegimge
#netfilter
archlinux mtp
Can't locate libplugins.pm
postfix mailbox_size_limit 2G
#xorg
ubuntu m3u mpg321
fsck: fsck.vfat: not found gentoo
#linux
ubuntu gdm_slave_xioerror_handler
|
|