Re: <pre>

"Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@hal.com>

Mail folder: html-archive
Next message: Daniel W. Connolly: "[Ad.Irvine@queens-belfast.ac.uk: &cx; in HTML+ ?]"
Previous message: Peter Flynn: "Re: <pre>"
Maybe in reply to: Daniel W. Connolly: "Re: <pre> "

Date: Thu, 6 Oct 94 18:08:02 EDT
Message-id: <9410062208.AA00901@ulua.hal.com>
Reply-To: connolly@hal.com
Originator: html-wg@oclc.org
Sender: html-wg@oclc.org
Precedence: bulk
From: "Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@hal.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <html-wg@oclc.org>
Subject: Re: <pre> 
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: HTML Working Group (Private)

In message <199410061545.QAA29423@curia.ucc.ie>, Peter Flynn writes:
>> 
>> The spec will say that CRLF is the correct way to break a line,
>> but it will encourage browser implementors to accept LF alone
>> as a linebreak, and caution authors and editor implementors
>> that CR alone will _not_ work. (right, Mike?)
>
>This sounds correct, but does this imply that incautious Mac users who
>make files containing plain ASCII text for PRE will have to insert LFs?

The way I understand it, this is the way it works today (see the
results of Corprew Reed's testing[1]). I see no reason to change it.

Dan

[1] http://www.acl.lanl.gov/HTML/html-archive.messages/432.html
    Date: Thu, 22 Sep 94 14:45:14 EDT
    Message-id: <CMM.0.90.4.780259432.reed@hades.cshl.org>
    From: Corprew Reed <corp@cshl.org>
    Subject: Re: Character Data