Re: non-break-space in tutorial

[Miles Bader]

On 6/8/05, Juri Linkov <address@hidden> wrote:
> Perhaps, you missed something.  It was your opinion about
> unsuitability of a modified background that I've taken into account
> before I started to think about a different solution.  I fully
> agree with you that a modified background is a bad solution.
> That's why I installed for people to try a completely different
> patch which I think is much better than anything proposed so far.
> A new solution puts the underline attribute on non-breaking spaces.
> This appropriately reflects the purpose of non-breaking spaces
> ("gluing" words together) and is not as annoying as anything else.

Then you mis-interpreted the objections to your original proposal. 
The strength of the old display method is that it uses a familiar
notation (backslash escape and common escape highlighting) to show
that NBSP/soft-hyphen are "funny" characters, rather than adding yet
another ad-hoc notation.

Now, you may dislike this representation, but the fact that you think
your preferred solution "is better than anything proposed so far"
doesn't make that some kind of undisputed fact.  [Clearly, because I'm
here disputing it.]

-Miles
-- 
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.