Re: Should nonbreakable space belong to whitespace class?
On 3/16/06, Denis Barbier <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > >While this is true from the point of view of determining whether to
> > >insert a line break or similar (hence "non-breaking space"), I would
> > >argue that it's *not* true from the point of view of determining
> > >what is and isn't a word.
> As told by Jacob Sparre Andersen, regular expression engines often
> provide a dedicated expression for this purpose.
> > >Therefore I would see no problem with including non-breaking spaces
> > >in the whitespace class. In fact, to me it seems rather perverse that
> > >something that visually is *clearly* white space is not classed as
> > >white space. To say that "white space" should be considered one word
> > >whereas "white space" is considered two just doesn't make sense to
> > >me.
> Honestly I do not understand this discussion at all. People have an
> opinion on a character they do not normally use in their language,
> and want to change its meaning. Those who have legitimate uses
> of this character are of course angry.
Of course, as long as you are not affected by an issue you can't even
grasp the problem. I know this because for Romanian there is the "s/t
comma below" / "s/t cedilla" issue which most people don't understand.
(Fuc^WThanks Microsoft for providing broken fonts!)
We, romanians, have also some issues with hyphens/no-breaking hyphens,
but because most of the fonts/applications just handle badly the
unicode point (on purpoose) we can't as hell do nothing about it.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein