Hanging indents for links separated by <br>

[Shannon Jacobs]

Re: Hanging indents for links separated by &lt;br&gt;

Spartanicus wrote:[color=blue]
> "Shannon Jacobs" <shanen@cashett e.com> wrote:[/color]
<snip>[color=blue][color=green]
>> Okay, I have to ask why you think it's incorrect markup?[/color]
>
> Instead of me guessing the nature of your content, prove me wrong and
> supply a url with some real content.[/color]

Why is it that common courtesy seems so rare in the contemporary newsgroups?
(I actually suspect some of it has to do with excessive anonymity.)

You (Spartanicus) have a funny way of trying to be helpful. You are trying
to be helpful, aren't you? And yet for some strange reason, I don't feel
motivated to prove anything to you. It's not that I think you are wrong, but
you do seem to be socially inept, and possibly fixated on CSS as your
ultimate tool of choice. For today's specific purpose, I reject CSS, so
perhaps the rejection of your tool makes you feel a need to become so
defensive? Reminds me of the joke about the kid with the new hammer who
suddenly sees everything as a nail.

And why did you cut away the following relevant part of the original?

"Insofar as it is quite reasonable for a term to have several definitions,
it seems to make perfect sense to allow multiple <DD> tags under one <DT>,
and the browsers clearly know how to lay them out appropriately."

Was it too unclear for you? Or are you really (somewhat rudely) asking for a
semantic justification? If so, easy enough. In this situation, the links can
be regarded as definitions of the category by way of example. In that
approach, multiple definitions of each categorical term are quite natural,
and it is nice that the implementation of HTML agrees.

Anyway, I've already stated that it's an intranet page. Perhaps your company
is different, but my employer's intranet pages are not to be transferred to
public Internet places. Or perhaps you have no intranet? I did go to a fair
bit of trouble to prepare a sanitized version of the key HTML, but you
apparently regard that as unsatisfactory. Well, there's just no satisfying
some people.

In conclusion, I think you have no actual reason for regarding my markup as
"incorrect" . I would ask you if you do have such a reason, but at this point
the question would have to dismissed as rhetorical.

On more relevant technical aspects, I found two of my colleagues who use
Dreameaver, but neither of them use DLs. However, one of them let me test it
on her machine to see how it worked there. Turns out that it requires the
same kludgy approach to achieve the same results. I think Dreamweaver is the
dominant HTML editor for English, and I do know HPB is dominant here, so it
seems this is not an editorial issue per se.

[Els]

Re: Hanging indents for links separated by &lt;br&gt;

Shannon Jacobs wrote:
[color=blue]
> Why is it that common courtesy seems so rare in the contemporary newsgroups?
> (I actually suspect some of it has to do with excessive anonymity.)[/color]

Don't count on it. Speaking for myself only of course, I'm as
ill-mannered in real life as I am here :-)
[color=blue]
> You (Spartanicus) have a funny way of trying to be helpful. You are trying
> to be helpful, aren't you?[/color]

You (Shannon) have a condescending tone right there in that sentence.
Are you socially inapt? (SCNR)
[color=blue]
> And why did you cut away the following relevant part of the original?[/color]
[color=blue]
> Was it too unclear for you?[/color]

You're starting to sound like the rest of us - be careful not to get
sucked in ;-)

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Now playing: Twarres - Little Sister

[Spartanicus]

Re: Hanging indents for links separated by &lt;br&gt;

"Shannon Jacobs" <shanen@cashett e.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>You (Spartanicus) have a funny way of trying to be helpful. You are trying
>to be helpful, aren't you?[/color]

This is a discussion group, not a help desk. Post something here and we
discuss it's implications, if that turns out to be helpful then that's a
bonus.
[color=blue]
>For today's specific purpose, I reject CSS[/color]

Then there is no reason to discuss it here.
[color=blue]
>And why did you cut away the following relevant part of the original?[/color]

I'm not going to waste my time second guessing the nature of your data
when you can clear the issue up definitively by providing a sample of
it.
[color=blue]
>I've already stated that it's an intranet page.[/color]

Then strictly speaking it is off topic here. Usually it is an irrelevant
distinction since the requirements for a quality intranet document are
typically no different from a www document.
[color=blue]
>my employer's intranet pages are not to be transferred to
>public Internet places.[/color]

A sample of the content would suffice, substitute the content by a
semantic equivalent if every scrap is considered sensitive. "Definition "
doesn't cut it since it doesn't allow scrutiny of your markup.

--
Spartanicus

[Peter]

Re: Hanging indents for links separated by &lt;br&gt;

Els wrote:
[color=blue]
>Shannon Jacobs wrote:
>
>
>[color=green]
>>Why is it that common courtesy seems so rare in the contemporary newsgroups?
>>(I actually suspect some of it has to do with excessive anonymity.)
>>
>>[/color]
>
>Don't count on it. Speaking for myself only of course, I'm as
>ill-mannered in real life as I am here :-)
>
>
>[/color]
Els, I´ve never seen you here as ill-mannered! You made me love you
being so helpful.
[color=blue][color=green]
>>You (Spartanicus) have a funny way of trying to be helpful. You are trying
>>to be helpful, aren't you?
>>
>>[/color]
>
>You (Shannon) have a condescending tone right there in that sentence.
>Are you socially inapt? (SCNR)
>
>
>[/color]
probably
[color=blue][color=green]
>>And why did you cut away the following relevant part of the original?
>>
>>[/color]
>
>
>[color=green]
>>Was it too unclear for you?
>>
>>[/color]
>
>You're starting to sound like the rest of us - be careful not to get
>sucked in ;-)
>
>
>[/color]
Peter

[Michael Stemper]

Re: Hanging indents for links separated by &lt;br&gt;

In article <42958f0e_4@new s1.prserv.net>, Shannon Jacobs writes:[color=blue]
>Spartanicus wrote:[color=green]
>> "Shannon Jacobs" <shanen@cashett e.com> wrote:[/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>> Okay, I have to ask why you think it's incorrect markup?[/color]
>>
>> Instead of me guessing the nature of your content, prove me wrong and
>> supply a url with some real content.[/color]
>
>Why is it that common courtesy seems so rare in the contemporary newsgroups?[/color]

Well, the most common form of discourtesy that I see in this newsgroup is
people who come in and act like it's a help desk that obligated to answer
their questions. These people tend to be arrogant oafs that won't even
let those who *do* try to help them either see their code or address the
root causes of their problems.
[color=blue]
> For today's specific purpose, I reject CSS, so[/color]

Then maybe you should go to a group that isn't intended specifically
for discussion of the use of style sheets.
[color=blue]
>Anyway, I've already stated that it's an intranet page.[/color]

Then maybe you should go to a group that isn't intended specifically
for discussion of the writing of style sheets for the WWW.
[color=blue]
>public Internet places. Or perhaps you have no intranet? I did go to a fair
>bit of trouble to prepare a sanitized version of the key HTML, but you
>apparently regard that as unsatisfactory.[/color]

Possibly because of the number of times that replication has either
introduced or eliminated an error. Possibly because of the number of
errors that have their root cause in the way a server is serving up
some file.
[color=blue]
> Well, there's just no satisfying
>some people.[/color]

Like those people who want free help but aren't willing to cooperate
with those who try to provide it.
[color=blue]
>In conclusion, I think you have no actual reason for regarding my markup as
>"incorrect" .[/color]

Since Sparticanus can't see your markup, there's no reason to regard it
as correct, either.
[color=blue]
> I would ask you if you do have such a reason,[/color]

Possibly the number of error-ridden pages seen in the past.

--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Discl aimer>
Time flies like an arrow.
Fruit flies like a banana.

[Shannon Jacobs]

Re: Hanging indents for links separated by &lt;br&gt;

I'm ignoring your rude tripe except for one comment. The reason this thread
started in this particular newsgroup was because I was attempting to use a
cumbersome CSS-based solution. The first response "contributi on" was
actually from a total n00b who might have several weeks of experience,
though his helpless enthusiasm was nicer than your mindless rudeness. If you
are so concerned about courtesy, perhaps you could begin by looking at the
full context.

In spite of the waste of resources, I'm leaving the rest of your comment
intact below as a kind of memorial. You might wise up and decide to cancel
your own pompous and blathersome post, but you can't cancel the memorial,
and I actually find it rather amusing as yet another example of why the
newsgroups have gone to heck these years. Having nothing to say, you'd have
been better off saying nothing.

Michael Stemper wrote:[color=blue]
> In article <42958f0e_4@new s1.prserv.net>, Shannon Jacobs writes:[color=green]
>> Spartanicus wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> "Shannon Jacobs" <shanen@cashett e.com> wrote:[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>> Okay, I have to ask why you think it's incorrect markup?
>>>
>>> Instead of me guessing the nature of your content, prove me wrong
>>> and supply a url with some real content.[/color]
>>
>> Why is it that common courtesy seems so rare in the contemporary
>> newsgroups?[/color]
>
> Well, the most common form of discourtesy that I see in this
> newsgroup is people who come in and act like it's a help desk that
> obligated to answer their questions. These people tend to be arrogant
> oafs that won't even let those who *do* try to help them either see
> their code or address the root causes of their problems.
>[color=green]
>> For today's specific purpose, I reject CSS, so[/color]
>
> Then maybe you should go to a group that isn't intended specifically
> for discussion of the use of style sheets.
>[color=green]
>> Anyway, I've already stated that it's an intranet page.[/color]
>
> Then maybe you should go to a group that isn't intended specifically
> for discussion of the writing of style sheets for the WWW.
>[color=green]
>> public Internet places. Or perhaps you have no intranet? I did go to
>> a fair bit of trouble to prepare a sanitized version of the key
>> HTML, but you apparently regard that as unsatisfactory.[/color]
>
> Possibly because of the number of times that replication has either
> introduced or eliminated an error. Possibly because of the number of
> errors that have their root cause in the way a server is serving up
> some file.
>[color=green]
>> Well, there's just no satisfying
>> some people.[/color]
>
> Like those people who want free help but aren't willing to cooperate
> with those who try to provide it.
>[color=green]
>> In conclusion, I think you have no actual reason for regarding my
>> markup as "incorrect" .[/color]
>
> Since Sparticanus can't see your markup, there's no reason to regard
> it as correct, either.
>[color=green]
>> I would ask you if you do have such a reason,[/color]
>
> Possibly the number of error-ridden pages seen in the past.[/color]

[Els]

Re: Hanging indents for links separated by &lt;br&gt;

Shannon Jacobs wrote:
[color=blue]
> I'm ignoring[/color]

You are ignoring the bottom-posting standard of this group. Why?
[color=blue]
> your rude tripe[/color]

Michael wasn't rude.
[color=blue]
> The first response "contributi on" was
> actually from a total n00b who might have several weeks of experience,
> though his helpless enthusiasm was nicer than your mindless rudeness.[/color]

The first response was by Spartanicus, who is anything but a 'n00b'.
The second response was by myself, and regardless of what you may
think, I'm not a 'n00b' either.
[color=blue]
> If you
> are so concerned about courtesy, perhaps you could begin by looking at the
> full context.
>
> In spite of the waste of resources, I'm leaving the rest of your comment
> intact below as a kind of memorial. You might wise up and decide to cancel
> your own pompous and blathersome post, but you can't cancel the memorial,
> and I actually find it rather amusing as yet another example of why the
> newsgroups have gone to heck these years. Having nothing to say, you'd have
> been better off saying nothing.[/color]

I'll leave that bit in for future generations to judge your attitude.
<g>

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -

[Shannon Jacobs]

Re: Hanging indents for links separated by &lt;br&gt;

Excuse me, but if you (Els) have NOTHING worth saying, why don't you shut
up? If you're not a n00b, my condolences on your slowness, and in any case
your childish enthusiasm, though briefly refreshing, is no excuse for your
tedious rudeness.

Anyway, I actually do have one tiny technical tidbit to contribute to the
solution of the actual layout problem, even though the original hanging
indents with CSS approach was a wild goose chase. (Considering the
essentially broken nature of the despicable and deprecated <br> tag, I
should have suspected as much.) I found an alternative input method in my
HTML editor to avoid the need to create and delete null <DT> tags. You can
just return to the end of the current <DT> tag and press <Enter> to create a
sequential <DD> tag. The residual catch is that you need to input your
definitions backwards from your desired sequence. (However, I still find
working directly on the HTML the most convenient method for this particular
purpose.)

My coworker with Dreamweaver was busy when I visited, so I couldn't test it
with that popular program, but we can leave that as an exercise for the
reader.

For the rest of it, you (Els) are just making me laugh. I still remember the
old days when the only users of the newsgroups were a tiny technical elite.
Very polite, competent, and quick witted. Many completely unboxable and
original thinkers, and many excellent problem solvers, even when the problem
was not clearly described. In my contrary way and not thinking of myself as
an elitist, I eagerly looked forward to the future when everyone would be
able to contribute to the collective wisdom of mankind. Now look at the mess
paved by those good intentions--but at least the elite has almost entirely
disappeared. I don't know which is more amusing, my youthful naivete or your
defensive mumblings. I'd say the future belongs to the wiki, but Wikipedia
has its problems, too, and I've mostly been cured of my naive optimism.

FYI: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Now THERE's an incurable optimist--but rather infamously rude, too.

Els wrote:[color=blue]
> Shannon Jacobs wrote:
>[color=green]
>> I'm ignoring[/color]
>
> You are ignoring the bottom-posting standard of this group. Why?
>[color=green]
>> your rude tripe[/color]
>
> Michael wasn't rude.
>[color=green]
>> The first response "contributi on" was
>> actually from a total n00b who might have several weeks of
>> experience, though his helpless enthusiasm was nicer than your
>> mindless rudeness.[/color]
>
> The first response was by Spartanicus, who is anything but a 'n00b'.
> The second response was by myself, and regardless of what you may
> think, I'm not a 'n00b' either.
>[color=green]
>> If you
>> are so concerned about courtesy, perhaps you could begin by looking
>> at the full context.
>>
>> In spite of the waste of resources, I'm leaving the rest of your
>> comment intact below as a kind of memorial. You might wise up and
>> decide to cancel your own pompous and blathersome post, but you
>> can't cancel the memorial, and I actually find it rather amusing as
>> yet another example of why the newsgroups have gone to heck these
>> years. Having nothing to say, you'd have been better off saying
>> nothing.[/color]
>
> I'll leave that bit in for future generations to judge your attitude.
> <g>[/color]

[kchayka]

Re: Hanging indents for links separated by &lt;br&gt;

Shannon Jacobs wrote:[color=blue]
>
> your childish enthusiasm, though briefly refreshing, is no excuse for your
> tedious rudeness.[/color]

This seems to be quite the case of the pot calling the kettle black,
though I can't recall Els *ever* being anything other than courteous and
helpful.

Biting off the hands that are most qualified to help you is a strange
way to win friends and influence people, not to mention getting help
with a particular problem. Note that just because you don't like a
response you get doesn't mean it has no value.

Good luck getting any assistance in the future. With your attitude,
you'll surely need it.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.

[Shannon Jacobs]

Re: Hanging indents for links separated by &lt;br&gt;

Near as I can tell, the following detail effectively exhausts the
substantive technical topic:

Dreamweaver (taken as the de facto standard professional HTML editor for
English) also works the same way. In summary, you can easily create
consecutive <DD> tags in (at least) three ways, by working directly in the
HTML window, by creating null (actually at least one character is required)
<DT> tags and deleting them later, or by returning to the end of the current
<DT> tag and hitting <Enter>.

Onwards to the meta-comments:

The bulk of the content in this thread is useless and irrelevant, mixed in
with some unprovoked dull rudeness. The only point you (kchayka) actually
manage to make is why it's usually a waste of time to look for answers to
difficult (technical) questions in the newsgroups these years. I'm not
criticising the (relative) n00b for his enthusiasm, and I'm not even denying
he is probably helpful for other newbies. Actually, I would make the
stronger argument that by teaching what he has just learned to other
newbies, he reinforces his own learning, which is mutually beneficial. It's
a kind of positive learning cycle and easy enough to ignore--as long as the
n00b doesn't make a nuisance of himself. (However, it's also helpful if some
non-newbies keep an eye out for neophyte mistakes and offer some corrective
guidance--but I (obviously) don't have the free time or patience.)

The other primary "contributo r" to this thread is probably what they call a
"Newsgroup Charlie". I usually get the impression that the chief motivation
of such a person is to demonstrate his "dazzling" superiority to us
benighted heathens--and a Newsgroup Charlie is typically quick to take
offense when he fails to dazzle. Newsgroup Charlies usually tour widely and
visibly in many newsgroups. The only remaining mystery is why such technical
mastery is apparently so lacking a real life. Had this been an actual life,
you'd think they'd spend more of it elsewhere, eh?

Anyway, as already noted, my main problem is an excessively strong memory.
Funny how I didn't really really appreciate those days of the polite and
competent elite until they were gone. In those years, you could ask a
difficult question with a realistic hope of getting a useful answer--and
even if your original formulation of the question was less than perfect.
These years, my main reason for posting in a typical public technical
newsgroup is because I've decided that describing and analyzing the problem
carefully for the sake of a public post might lead to a solution--which is
exactly what happened in this case. Sorry, but no thanks to the other
"contributo rs". These years, even when they do manage to write something
helpful, it's just as likely to be an accident.

kchayka wrote:[color=blue]
> Shannon Jacobs wrote:[color=green]
>>
>> your childish enthusiasm, though briefly refreshing, is no excuse
>> for your tedious rudeness.[/color]
>
> This seems to be quite the case of the pot calling the kettle black,
> though I can't recall Els *ever* being anything other than courteous
> and helpful.
>
> Biting off the hands that are most qualified to help you is a strange
> way to win friends and influence people, not to mention getting help
> with a particular problem. Note that just because you don't like a
> response you get doesn't mean it has no value.
>
> Good luck getting any assistance in the future. With your attitude,
> you'll surely need it.[/color]

[Steve]

Re: Hanging indents for links separated by &lt;br&gt;

On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 13:26:52 +0900, Shannon Jacobs in comp.infosystem s.www.authoring.stylesheets wrote:[color=blue]
>Near as I can tell, the following detail effectively exhausts the
>substantive technical topic:[/color]
[color=blue]
>Dreamweaver (taken as the de facto standard professional HTML editor for
>English) also works the same way. In summary, you can easily create
>consecutive <DD> tags in (at least) three ways, by working directly in the
>HTML window, by creating null (actually at least one character is required)
><DT> tags and deleting them later, or by returning to the end of the current
><DT> tag and hitting <Enter>.[/color]
[color=blue]
>Onwards to the meta-comments:[/color]
[color=blue]
>The bulk of the content in this thread is useless and irrelevant,[/color]

I'm still interested in why you're ignoring the conventions of this
newsgroup and top posting, after being implored not to ? Is that because
you're just a rude person, or you simply have to prevail in every
situation, as the one that's always right ?

Either way, you're the individual coming off as being the arrogant one.

--
marathon
Never trust anyone who says money is no object.