[rfc-i] Pagination requirements
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Thu May 24 11:28:08 PDT 2012
On 2012-05-24 20:19, Joe Touch wrote:
> I'm claiming that variable fonts does NOT require reflow.
Yes. I hear you. They do not require reflow, but they are much better
when reflow can happen.
> Variable fonts + reflow still destroys lists, tables, etc. UNLESS there
> is other support for spacing - e.g., tabs or indent changes.
Yes. That's why I think that sticking with text/plain isn't going to work.
> Variable fonts + such tabs/indents works fine, and does NOT *require*
> reflow. It doesn't reflow, but it still gives non-scrambled output.
Do you have a concrete format in mind that you want to propose?
I'm asking because HTML has solved all these issues, and I haven't seen
a serious alternate proposal that does this as well.
> Yes - TXT is not HTML, and TXT requires fixed fonts to make the indents
> work on things like tables and lists, in addition to art. This is more
> important for tables and code than lists per se - lists are just
> shifted. In the Word template, tables and code use the same style - that
But they are shifted inconsistently when part of the indentation uses
characters which are not the same width.
> of figures - for exactly that reason, i.e., so Word won't reflow the
> text at edit-time.
Treating tables as something preformatted is not only a disservice to
people with other display sizes, but also to those who have to rely on
Best regards, Julian
More information about the rfc-interest