View Single Post
Old 02-16-2018, 08:37 PM   #13
sjfan
Addict
sjfan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.sjfan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.sjfan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.sjfan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.sjfan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.sjfan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.sjfan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.sjfan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.sjfan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.sjfan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.sjfan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 281
Karma: 7724454
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Bethesda, MD, USA
Device: Kobo Aura H20, Kobo Clara HD
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger64 View Post
Contrary to nbsp, nnbsp do have a fixed width (with variable interpretations ).
This is not defined anywhere and is subject to change based on what a browser (or word processor, etc) implementation thinks is most aesthetic. Many browsers used to use an unadjusted width for nbsp, but that's changed in recent years because it looks horrible in many common cases. You also noted that Word has gone back and forth on that question. nnbsp could likewise act differently in different programs.

If I wanted a guaranteed fixed width space that didn't break, I'd use one of the defined fixed width spaces (en space, 3-per-em space, etc) inside a span or other element with a "white-space: nowrap" style attached.
sjfan is offline   Reply With Quote