Indents

[Albert Kemp Jr.]

Hello everyone....

>From the different comments I've read so far, there seems to be no one 
complete solution to this problem.  However, I prefer (and recommend) 
the transparent GIF approach.  Just one tiny image (2x2 pixels) is all 
you need.  You can adjust the size of the indent or margin by increasing 
the width attribute in the IMG tag.  For example:

	<img width=40 src="space.gif" alt="">

I've successfully used this method to format text on a number of pages.
It also has application for tables, when you need to add whitespace
between text or images within a particular cell.

Sure, it can be a bit unsightly if you've got graphics turned off, 
but I don't use a graphical browser only to read text and fill out
forms.  If that's all I cared about, I'd be using Lynx.
 
My two cents..... :)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Albert Kemp Jr.           [[][][]]   Net: akemp at library.uwaterloo.ca
Library Asst., Systems    [[][][]]   Web: http://www.lib.uwaterloo.ca/~akemp
University of Waterloo    [[][][]]   Fax: (519) 746-1758
Ontario, Canada  N2L3G1    ######
(519) 888-4567, x5377    [[](||)[]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Thomas Dowling wrote:

> I'm a little disappointed at the seeming willingness on this list to
> recommend deliberately broken HTML structures to kludge together a solution
> to a formatting problem.  IMO this is akin to squeezing awkward cataloging
> data into the wrong MARC field on the presumption that it will come out
> looking right on most OPACs.  <UL> defines an unordered list.  <DL> defines
> a definition list, like a glossary.  <BLOCKQUOTE> defines, umm, a block of
> quoted material.
> 
> Dirty solutions like multiple <UL> or <DL> tags with no <LI> or <DT> do in
> fact work on a certain percentage of browsers, possibly a very high
> percentage.  But you are left with absolutely no guarantee that the next
> hot browser will choose to display these structural elements the way the
> current hot browsers do; in fact it's quite likely that a browser will come
> along that will allow the *user* to determine how an unordered list will be
> presented (indented with bullets? change of font? change of background
> color?).  If you're satisfied with serving users with Netscape 1.2, 2.0,
> 3.0, and don't mind the possibility of having to rewrite all your documents
> next year, and don't envision ever indexing your site, I guess you can go
> ahead.
> 
> In cases where formatting elements like indentation are really necessary
> for the document, there are lots of options, with varying degrees of
> support and elegance:
> 
> 
> Present the document as .txt rather than .html.  Pros: universal support. 
> Cons: monospaced font, lack of hypertext links, no pretty logo.
> 
> Slap <PRE>...</PRE> around the text of the document.  Pros: universal
> support, pretty logo at the top, hypertext links.  Cons: monospaced font.
> 
> PDF.  Pros: you're using a page description language, which is what you
> really need.  Cons: requires commercial software to create the file, less
> than universal support, possible charges from some quarters of being
> elitist and a pawn in Adobe's attempt to take over the world. :-)
> 
> Distribute in a word processor format (most likely Word).  Pros: layout
> control similar to PDF, many users can edit the document once they have it.
>  Cons: requires a compatible word processor or Word viewer, possible
> charges of being elitist and a pawn in Microsoft's attempt to take over the
> world.
> 
> Style sheets.  Pros: in line with a standard that is both supported by the
> web community and gaining favor among some browser manufacturers, lets you
> define or redefine a style (e.g. P.indent1) once for your entire site and
> reference it from any document with a <P class="indent1"> tag.  Cons: very
> limited support as of 8/1/96.
> 
> <SPACER> tag.  Pros: will probably be supported by 40%-50% of your users
> within a couple months.  Cons: another kludge from the gang at Tags-R-Us.
> 
> <TABLE> tag e.g.
> <tr><td colspan=4>Top level paragraph.
>   <tr><td> <td colspan=3>Second level paragraph
> Pros: fairly wide support.  Cons: less than universal support, memory
> problems on some platforms if the document gets too long.
> 
> Preface each line with <PRE>[spaces]</PRE> and end each line with <BR>. 
> Pros: fairly wide support.  Cons: looks really ugly if the previous line
> wraps in a window narrower than you expected, some browsers mistakenly slap
> a line feed after the </PRE> tag.
> 
> Preface each line with &nbsp;&nbsp;... Pros: fairly wide support.  Cons:
> same line wrap problems as above, no rule that multiple nbsp entities
> shouldn't be collapsed into a single space (the rule only says no line
> break there).
> 
> Preface each line with one or more tab-sized, completely transparent GIFs. 
> Pros: fairly wide support.  Cons: line wraps, *really* ugly for people
> using graphical browsers with the graphics turned off.
> 
> <UL>/<DL>/<BLOCKQUOTE> kludge described in previous posts.  Pros: will
> "look right" to many users.  Cons: violates the spirit and sometimes the
> letter of the HTML law, may get mild grumblings from some validation
> services, HTML editors, grumpy old Web4Libbers, etc.
> 
> 
> Thomas Dowling
> tdowling at ohiolink.edu
> (This is a dream.  I'm going to wake up, it will be the summer of 1995, and
> all known browser manufacturers will be presenting beta versions supporting
> all of the newly formalized HTML 3.0, including style sheets and the <TAB>
> tag.  Also, I will have won the lottery the night before.)
> 
>