From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1P1QBB-0002fh-75 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2010 20:56:38 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0FABEE0CA1; Thu, 30 Sep 2010 20:56:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E524EE0CA1 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2010 20:56:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97DBB1B4025 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2010 20:56:09 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.281 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.281 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.318, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TCbCDAnHq0iP for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2010 20:56:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EE8F1B418D for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2010 20:55:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P1QAT-0008Bg-DH for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2010 22:55:53 +0200 Received: from dsl.comtrol.com ([64.122.56.22]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2010 22:55:53 +0200 Received: from grant.b.edwards by dsl.comtrol.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2010 22:55:53 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Grant Edwards Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: ridiculously wide handbook pages Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 20:55:45 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl.comtrol.com User-Agent: slrn/pre0.9.9-102 (Linux) X-Archives-Salt: bf31dea2-da15-4c22-a6a0-61d2c6ae08a2 X-Archives-Hash: c7de744dade40c92d5c84a4850766aec On 2010-09-30, J??rg Schaible wrote: >> I could reduce the minimum size of my "fixed" font, but that only >> helps until the next web page comes along with an even wider code >> block. > > Try a different fixed font. At the end I've chosen "Monotype", > because it seems to have the narrowest well-readable letters. That's still just a kludge/bandage for a broken document. I've got no complaint about the width of the listing blocks. The problem is that the wrap width of normal text paragraphs shouldn't be determined by the width of listing blocks. It should be determined by the width of the browser window. I'd also set a maximum text width to keep paragraphs somewhat readable when you widen the window to see all of a really wide listing block. But, I'm willing to admit that's a more of a style/preference question. Here's an example of how to do it right (both decoupled text/listing widths and a max-width for text): http://www.panix.com/~grante/wrapdemo.html I've filed a bug, so anybody with an opinion can weigh in there as well. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! Everybody gets free at BORSCHT! gmail.com