word wrapping
-
Honey, ascenders and descenders are letters like 't', 'l', 'h' that ascend above a standard 'a' type character and descenders are 'p', 'q', 'y' that descend below a standard 'a' type character.
Oh I thought it was going to be something weird. Yeah my stuff does that. It's basic truetype. you couldn't render fonts without it.
Real programmers use butterflies
-
Oh I thought it was going to be something weird. Yeah my stuff does that. It's basic truetype. you couldn't render fonts without it.
Real programmers use butterflies
Jargon is always scary until you know what it means!
-
Look at the CSS options which cover a lot https://tippingpoint.dev/pure-css-truncate-text Seem like simple wrap would be good for an ereader just splitting the word at the last char on the line...no ellipses or such needed.
That's what I'm hoping I can get away with. =)
Real programmers use butterflies
-
Quote:
I could tell my client that but it's not true,
You appaer to be in agreement with this statement of mine:
Quote:
Sure, you can get part of the way there on an atmega platform
So, yeah, that's completely true and factual - you can definitely get part of the way there! I'm guessing that the easiest bits can be done (inter-word spacing and hyphenation at syllable boundaries), but anything else you add in is going to result in a ragged right-edge. If you are okay with a ragged right edge, then it all becomes doable on an ESP32 (that's like what, 80KB RAM?)
Adding, you didn't mention an atmega before so I'm not sure what you're quoting. In any case I didn't agree or disagree with that statement because you didn't make it. This is what I responding to:
Maybe you should tell your client that the project they contracted you for is not completely realisable on their choice of hardware.
Real programmers use butterflies
-
--------------------
Well, I'd split on a
space if possible,
but that isn't
always possible,
particularly with
"supercalifragilisti
cexpialidocious",
which exceeds the
line length all on
its own. -
Say I don't have room to wrap a single world like supercalifragilisticexpialidocious. In the real world, I'd just find a syllable and then hyphenate. I don't think I can do that - and i don't think i *should* do that in html and css. I don't know *what* to do. What would you do?
Real programmers use butterflies
If me I'd question if this a complication that actually needs handling or just a programming challenge I want to figure out. Real world: what application this on, why would there not be enough screen space in current era. If was user input box on very narrow component, well the problem is flipped why user inputting into narrow viewed space, why cant space be increased. if label - again flip word. having it increase height of space might not be desirable, so leaves truncation "." "..." as an option. Put generically: figure out if this a problem that needs solving or if asking the wrong question.
-
If me I'd question if this a complication that actually needs handling or just a programming challenge I want to figure out. Real world: what application this on, why would there not be enough screen space in current era. If was user input box on very narrow component, well the problem is flipped why user inputting into narrow viewed space, why cant space be increased. if label - again flip word. having it increase height of space might not be desirable, so leaves truncation "." "..." as an option. Put generically: figure out if this a problem that needs solving or if asking the wrong question.
I mean that's fair, but here's the thing: I don't know the screen size and it may be as small as 300px across. It's an e-reader 300px is not practical for an e-reader, I know - but it's more about me not knowing the functional design specs of the hardware yet. I'm coding defensively in light of lack of solid specs yet. We simply can't know the specs yet, but it will probably be about 600px across like the nook but there may be a smaller version that's more pocketable if that's practical. Still, if they zoom in, or if the title (H1 tag) is long it could still be a problem.
Real programmers use butterflies
-
Adding, you didn't mention an atmega before so I'm not sure what you're quoting. In any case I didn't agree or disagree with that statement because you didn't make it. This is what I responding to:
Maybe you should tell your client that the project they contracted you for is not completely realisable on their choice of hardware.
Real programmers use butterflies
Quote:
Adding, you didn't mention an atmega before so I'm not sure what you're quoting.
I'm quoting this post over here, which as you can see contains the sentence you missed: The Lounge[^]
Quote:
This is what I responding to: Maybe you should tell your client that the project they contracted you for is not completely realisable on their choice of hardware.
Seems you're in agreement with that too, since you say:
Quote:
not that I'm trying to implement all of it - just enough to show most epubs mostly correctly.
That's what "not completely realisable" means.
-
Quote:
Adding, you didn't mention an atmega before so I'm not sure what you're quoting.
I'm quoting this post over here, which as you can see contains the sentence you missed: The Lounge[^]
Quote:
This is what I responding to: Maybe you should tell your client that the project they contracted you for is not completely realisable on their choice of hardware.
Seems you're in agreement with that too, since you say:
Quote:
not that I'm trying to implement all of it - just enough to show most epubs mostly correctly.
That's what "not completely realisable" means.
First of all, you never mentioned the atmega in that post. I just looked at the link you gave me. I didn't miss a sentence. What was being discussed was the Arduino framework. It is only incidently related to an atmega in that an atmega will run it. It's not the only thing that does.
Member 13301679 wrote:
That's what "not completely realisable" means.
It's what this means
Member 13301679 wrote:
Maybe you should tell your client that the project they contracted you for is not completely realisable
I bolded the relevant bits. You forgot the operative part. I was never contracted to build a 100% to spec e-reader.
Real programmers use butterflies
-
First of all, you never mentioned the atmega in that post. I just looked at the link you gave me. I didn't miss a sentence. What was being discussed was the Arduino framework. It is only incidently related to an atmega in that an atmega will run it. It's not the only thing that does.
Member 13301679 wrote:
That's what "not completely realisable" means.
It's what this means
Member 13301679 wrote:
Maybe you should tell your client that the project they contracted you for is not completely realisable
I bolded the relevant bits. You forgot the operative part. I was never contracted to build a 100% to spec e-reader.
Real programmers use butterflies
Quote:
First of all, you never mentioned the atmega in that post. I just looked at the link you gave me. I didn't miss a sentence. What was being discussed was the Arduino framework. It is only incidently related to an atmega in that an atmega will run it. It's not the only thing that does.
Okay, what do you see as the second sentence in [^]?
Quote:
Member 13301679 wrote: That's what "not completely realisable" means. It's what this means Member 13301679 wrote: Maybe you should tell your client that the project they contracted you for is not completely realisable I bolded the relevant bits. You forgot the operative part. I was never contracted to build a 100% to spec e-reader.
The operative part being that you don't do this for money? It's damn funny then that you lecture some who does get paid for embedded stuff you are trying to learn :-) Anyway, back to the topic, you bolded the part where I said it's not compeletely realisable, and then you said you can do most of it, mostly. Sounds like you agree but can't bring yourself to admit it. No as much as I like to see people whine that "I can't see the word atmega in a paragraph of two sentences" when given a direct link, I cannot entertain your self-humiliation much longer - as a professional I have paying clients to attend to. You'd do the same once you start getting paid for your "work".
-
Quote:
First of all, you never mentioned the atmega in that post. I just looked at the link you gave me. I didn't miss a sentence. What was being discussed was the Arduino framework. It is only incidently related to an atmega in that an atmega will run it. It's not the only thing that does.
Okay, what do you see as the second sentence in [^]?
Quote:
Member 13301679 wrote: That's what "not completely realisable" means. It's what this means Member 13301679 wrote: Maybe you should tell your client that the project they contracted you for is not completely realisable I bolded the relevant bits. You forgot the operative part. I was never contracted to build a 100% to spec e-reader.
The operative part being that you don't do this for money? It's damn funny then that you lecture some who does get paid for embedded stuff you are trying to learn :-) Anyway, back to the topic, you bolded the part where I said it's not compeletely realisable, and then you said you can do most of it, mostly. Sounds like you agree but can't bring yourself to admit it. No as much as I like to see people whine that "I can't see the word atmega in a paragraph of two sentences" when given a direct link, I cannot entertain your self-humiliation much longer - as a professional I have paying clients to attend to. You'd do the same once you start getting paid for your "work".
I like that you think I'm trying to learn. I get paid to write embedded. I'm done with you. I have no patience for hubris.
Real programmers use butterflies
-
--------------------
Well, I'd split on a
space if possible,
but that isn't
always possible,
particularly with
"supercalifragilisti
cexpialidocious",
which exceeds the
line length all on
its own. -
Say I don't have room to wrap a single world like supercalifragilisticexpialidocious. In the real world, I'd just find a syllable and then hyphenate. I don't think I can do that - and i don't think i *should* do that in html and css. I don't know *what* to do. What would you do?
Real programmers use butterflies
It sounds like you are leaning toward a hard break at the display margin. Instead of using a hyphen, how about another pair of symbols? I am thinking of the proof readers notation when two words are supposed to be joined. It is like a subscripted “u” that connects the words. Draw half of it on the break, and the other half on the continuation. Or use an ellipsis at both the break and the continuation. Or just a random hyphen. Don’t worry about being correct for a word like that. It will likely never happen.
-
It sounds like you are leaning toward a hard break at the display margin. Instead of using a hyphen, how about another pair of symbols? I am thinking of the proof readers notation when two words are supposed to be joined. It is like a subscripted “u” that connects the words. Draw half of it on the break, and the other half on the continuation. Or use an ellipsis at both the break and the continuation. Or just a random hyphen. Don’t worry about being correct for a word like that. It will likely never happen.
I think I might implement this: Section 5.9. Line-Breaking Properties | Unicode Explained[^]
Real programmers use butterflies
-
Say I don't have room to wrap a single world like supercalifragilisticexpialidocious. In the real world, I'd just find a syllable and then hyphenate. I don't think I can do that - and i don't think i *should* do that in html and css. I don't know *what* to do. What would you do?
Real programmers use butterflies
You might consider "soft hyphens" - Cheerio
-
You might consider "soft hyphens" - Cheerio
I have since found something called the Unicode Line Breaking algorithm and I've decided to go that route.
Real programmers use butterflies