experience with/opinions on justification and CSS white-space properties in email?
ben.bucksch at beonex.com
Thu Jul 1 10:34:41 UTC 2010
On 01.07.2010 00:22, Daniel Glazman wrote:
> Justification is exactly what it means in your favorite text processor
OK, thanks for the clarification. I couldn't know, because I never used
a word processor with English UI. "Justification" for me meant "a
supporting argument" :).
> We're not using it _now_ in text/plain email. But it could make sense:
> Launch your preferred Office suite, type some kilometers of
> text, switch all to a monospace font like Courier and justify
> the text. Just like in the current paragraph that I
> manually justified.
> And then the user in me thinks "why not?" in email...
> I am not asking if you're using it. I am asking "will you *ever* use
If we were to implement something like that in plaintext mail, we would
do the "justification" ourselves, by adding the fixed-width spaces
If nothing else for backwards compatibility to HTML renderers who don't
support this combination, and more importantly for pure plaintext emails.
That said, I don't see us adding this feature at all. Even on HTML pages
with proportional font, I barely ever see "justified" text. And if we
were to implement it, we probably wouldn't use the CSS feature. And if
we need to do it internally in the editor, we can do it regardless of
> We plan to make "text-align: justify" fallback to "text-align:
> initial" when used on a "white-space: pre" or "white-space: pre-wrap"
> element and we're not going to reverse that later.
That sounds sensible to me. I don't think CSS needs to support every
theoretically possible combination of CSS features, esp. if they are
hard to implement and esoteric to use, in that case it's fine to define
that this combination is not supported. Implementing CSS is hard enough
More information about the tb-planning