By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
458,025 Members | 1,218 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 458,025 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Can't achive the same margins for <a> and (inline) <p> in CSS

P: n/a
I'm creating a common navigation bar of text "buttons" using CSS. On each
page, I want the corresponding button to be "inert" (no hover, etc) as a
visual clue to where you are.

I thought I'd include simple <p> tags, and style them the same way as the
<a> tags, but I can't get it to work - I get different margins in each case.

I've reduced the situation to the essentials here:
http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.net/CssMargins/

Is there a fix, or am I swimming against the current? Suggestions very
welcome - it's driving me mad!

--
####################
## PH, London
####################
Jul 20 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
33 Replies


P: n/a
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 15:19:12 +0000 (UTC), "Philip Herlihy"
<fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote:
I'm creating a common navigation bar of text "buttons" using CSS. On each
page, I want the corresponding button to be "inert" (no hover, etc) as a
visual clue to where you are.

I thought I'd include simple <p> tags, and style them the same way as the
<a> tags, but I can't get it to work - I get different margins in each case.

I've reduced the situation to the essentials here:
http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.net/CssMargins/

Is there a fix, or am I swimming against the current? Suggestions very
welcome - it's driving me mad!


Why use <p>? In the context of the rest of your code <span> would make
more sense.

Steve

Jul 20 '05 #2

P: n/a
"Philip Herlihy" <fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote:
I'm creating a common navigation bar of text "buttons" using CSS. On each
page, I want the corresponding button to be "inert" (no hover, etc) as a
visual clue to where you are.

I thought I'd include simple <p> tags, and style them the same way as the
<a> tags, but I can't get it to work - I get different margins in each case.

I've reduced the situation to the essentials here:
http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.net/CssMargins/

Is there a fix, or am I swimming against the current? Suggestions very
welcome - it's driving me mad!


You should have mentioned that this quirk is specific to IE.

An unordered list is commonly accepted as the correct markup for a
navbar.

--
Spartanicus
Jul 20 '05 #3

P: n/a
Philip,

It isn't quite clear (to me) what it is that you are attempting to
accomplish. When your page opens in my browser the paragraph box is appears
attached to link 1 and link 2 appears as a box just to the right of the
paragraph and link 1, but for a small gap between them.

The confusion is that you start off by saying that you want an "inert"
effect, but the second paragraph you discuss margins.

Please clarify.

"Philip Herlihy" <fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote in message
news:ci**********@hercules.btinternet.com...
I'm creating a common navigation bar of text "buttons" using CSS. On each
page, I want the corresponding button to be "inert" (no hover, etc) as a
visual clue to where you are.

I thought I'd include simple <p> tags, and style them the same way as the
<a> tags, but I can't get it to work - I get different margins in each case.
I've reduced the situation to the essentials here:
http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.net/CssMargins/

Is there a fix, or am I swimming against the current? Suggestions very
welcome - it's driving me mad!

--
####################
## PH, London
####################

Jul 20 '05 #4

P: n/a
I noticed that Message-ID: <ci**********@hercules.btinternet.com> from
Philip Herlihy contained the following:
I thought I'd include simple <p> tags, and style them the same way as the
<a> tags, but I can't get it to work - I get different margins in each case.

I've reduced the situation to the essentials here:
http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.net/CssMargins/


I was going to suggest display: inline but I see you've done it. Is it
the spacing between that is the problem. I see it in IE but not in
Firefox

--
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/
Jul 20 '05 #5

P: n/a
Philip,

(Earlier, I attempted to respond to your message. For some reason it never
posted.)

Exactly what is it that you want to accomplish? Is it to close up the small
gap between link 1 & link 2 or widen the gap between paragraph and link 1.

Please clarify what you want to appear.
"Philip Herlihy" <fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote in message
news:ci**********@hercules.btinternet.com...
I'm creating a common navigation bar of text "buttons" using CSS. On each
page, I want the corresponding button to be "inert" (no hover, etc) as a
visual clue to where you are.

I thought I'd include simple <p> tags, and style them the same way as the
<a> tags, but I can't get it to work - I get different margins in each case.
I've reduced the situation to the essentials here:
http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.net/CssMargins/

Is there a fix, or am I swimming against the current? Suggestions very
welcome - it's driving me mad!

--
####################
## PH, London
####################

Jul 20 '05 #6

P: n/a
<p> lends itself better to editing in WYSIWYG mode in editors like
Dreamweaver, but I'll try using <span> and see what happens. - thanks!

--
####################
## PH, London
####################
"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote in message
news:nk********************************@4ax.com...
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 15:19:12 +0000 (UTC), "Philip Herlihy"
<fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote:
I'm creating a common navigation bar of text "buttons" using CSS. On eachpage, I want the corresponding button to be "inert" (no hover, etc) as a
visual clue to where you are.

I thought I'd include simple <p> tags, and style them the same way as the
<a> tags, but I can't get it to work - I get different margins in each case.
I've reduced the situation to the essentials here:
http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.net/CssMargins/

Is there a fix, or am I swimming against the current? Suggestions very
welcome - it's driving me mad!


Why use <p>? In the context of the rest of your code <span> would make
more sense.

Steve

Jul 20 '05 #7

P: n/a
I found I was getting the same quirk in Opera, so it's not just IE. I'm
grateful for the tip about unordered lists - I just thought a <p> was
simpler, as there is no need to turn off the marker. I'll experiment -
thanks.

--
####################
## PH, London
####################
"Spartanicus" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:0v********************************@news.spart anicus.utvinternet.ie...
"Philip Herlihy" <fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote:
I'm creating a common navigation bar of text "buttons" using CSS. On eachpage, I want the corresponding button to be "inert" (no hover, etc) as a
visual clue to where you are.

I thought I'd include simple <p> tags, and style them the same way as the
<a> tags, but I can't get it to work - I get different margins in each case.
I've reduced the situation to the essentials here:
http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.net/CssMargins/

Is there a fix, or am I swimming against the current? Suggestions very
welcome - it's driving me mad!


You should have mentioned that this quirk is specific to IE.

An unordered list is commonly accepted as the correct markup for a
navbar.

--
Spartanicus

Jul 20 '05 #8

P: n/a
The <p> tag (not being an <a>) does give the "inert" effect I want, in that
it doesn't trigger my default hover effect set using "a:hover". However,
p's and a's seem to have different margin properties - I'd have liked both
types to appear identically, and you can see from my example code that this
doesn't happen. The ultimately desired effect would be to have no gaps
between the items at all.

The example code omits everything which isn't necessary to demonstrate the
margin weirdness, so there's no hover effect.

Hope that's clearer (somehow I doubt it!). Thanks for your interest,
anyway!

--
####################
## PH, London
####################
"Richard B." <rb******@socal.rr.com> wrote in message
news:uI*****************@twister.socal.rr.com...
Philip,

It isn't quite clear (to me) what it is that you are attempting to
accomplish. When your page opens in my browser the paragraph box is appears attached to link 1 and link 2 appears as a box just to the right of the
paragraph and link 1, but for a small gap between them.

The confusion is that you start off by saying that you want an "inert"
effect, but the second paragraph you discuss margins.

Please clarify.

"Philip Herlihy" <fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote in message
news:ci**********@hercules.btinternet.com...
I'm creating a common navigation bar of text "buttons" using CSS. On each page, I want the corresponding button to be "inert" (no hover, etc) as a
visual clue to where you are.

I thought I'd include simple <p> tags, and style them the same way as the <a> tags, but I can't get it to work - I get different margins in each

case.

I've reduced the situation to the essentials here:
http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.net/CssMargins/

Is there a fix, or am I swimming against the current? Suggestions very
welcome - it's driving me mad!

--
####################
## PH, London
####################


Jul 20 '05 #9

P: n/a
Just so - it's the spacing inconsistencies that give me the problem - in my
example code I've removed anything inessential to demonstrating this. I got
the same problem in Opera, but haven't tried other browsers so far.

--
####################
## PH, London
####################
"Geoff Berrow" <bl******@ckdog.co.uk> wrote in message
news:5i********************************@4ax.com...
I noticed that Message-ID: <ci**********@hercules.btinternet.com> from
Philip Herlihy contained the following:
I thought I'd include simple <p> tags, and style them the same way as the
<a> tags, but I can't get it to work - I get different margins in each case.
I've reduced the situation to the essentials here:
http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.net/CssMargins/


I was going to suggest display: inline but I see you've done it. Is it
the spacing between that is the problem. I see it in IE but not in
Firefox

--
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

Jul 20 '05 #10

P: n/a
To have the gaps the same (and zero).

--
####################
## PH, London
####################
"Richard B." <rb******@socal.rr.com> wrote in message
news:qp*****************@twister.socal.rr.com...
Philip,

(Earlier, I attempted to respond to your message. For some reason it never
posted.)

Exactly what is it that you want to accomplish? Is it to close up the small gap between link 1 & link 2 or widen the gap between paragraph and link 1.

Please clarify what you want to appear.
"Philip Herlihy" <fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote in message
news:ci**********@hercules.btinternet.com...
I'm creating a common navigation bar of text "buttons" using CSS. On each page, I want the corresponding button to be "inert" (no hover, etc) as a
visual clue to where you are.

I thought I'd include simple <p> tags, and style them the same way as the <a> tags, but I can't get it to work - I get different margins in each

case.

I've reduced the situation to the essentials here:
http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.net/CssMargins/

Is there a fix, or am I swimming against the current? Suggestions very
welcome - it's driving me mad!

--
####################
## PH, London
####################


Jul 20 '05 #11

P: n/a
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 20:53:37 +0000 (UTC), Philip Herlihy wrote:
<p> lends itself better to editing in WYSIWYG
WYSIWYG applies well to paper, ..or engravings
in stone, but not the internet.
..mode in editors like Dreamweaver,..


The page will not look quite the same in IE,
Lynx, Safari, Firefox or an early Netscape UA.
So WYSIWYG should actually be relabelled (in this
instance) WYSIWYGWLAIWDW (what you see is what
you get, when looking at it with dream weaver).

--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology
http://www.lensescapes.com/ Images that escape the mundane
Jul 20 '05 #12

P: n/a
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 20:53:37 +0000 (UTC), Philip Herlihy wrote:
<p> lends itself better to editing in WYSIWYG mode in editors like
Dreamweaver, but I'll try using <span> and see what happens. - thanks!


BTW - you will find the folks here are more
eager to help if you refrain from top-posting..
<http://www.physci.org/codes/javafaq.jsp#netiquette>

--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology
http://www.lensescapes.com/ Images that escape the mundane
Jul 20 '05 #13

P: n/a
Kindly don't top post in this group, don't place quotes below a sig
delimiter (dash dash space) and trim down quotes to the bare minimum.

Corrected this once.

"Philip Herlihy" <fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote:
>http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.net/CssMargins/
>
>Is there a fix, or am I swimming against the current? Suggestions very
>welcome - it's driving me mad!
You should have mentioned that this quirk is specific to IE.

I found I was getting the same quirk in Opera
Incorrect.
, so it's not just IE.
It is specific to IE.
I just thought a <p> was simpler, as there is no need to turn off the marker.


Markup content according to what it is, not how you want it to look,
that's the task of css.

--
Spartanicus
Jul 20 '05 #14

P: n/a
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 15:19:12 +0000 (UTC), "Philip Herlihy"
<fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote:
I'm creating a common navigation bar of text "buttons" using CSS. On each
page, I want the corresponding button to be "inert" (no hover, etc) as a
visual clue to where you are.

I thought I'd include simple <p> tags, and style them the same way as the
<a> tags, but I can't get it to work - I get different margins in each case.

I've reduced the situation to the essentials here:
http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.net/CssMargins/

Is there a fix, or am I swimming against the current? Suggestions very
welcome - it's driving me mad!


You've replaced an inline element <a> with a block level <p>. Why not
use the inline <span> instead of <p>. Your example works in my
browser (Firefox), I note you declare <p> to be 'inline'.

Roger
Jul 20 '05 #15

P: n/a
Lets keep content and presentation separate, shall we?

--
####################
## PH, London
####################
"Andrew Thompson" <Se********@www.invalid> wrote in message
news:rr*****************************@40tude.net...
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 20:53:37 +0000 (UTC), Philip Herlihy wrote:
<p> lends itself better to editing in WYSIWYG mode in editors like
Dreamweaver, but I'll try using <span> and see what happens. - thanks!


BTW - you will find the folks here are more
eager to help if you refrain from top-posting..
<http://www.physci.org/codes/javafaq.jsp#netiquette>

--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology
http://www.lensescapes.com/ Images that escape the mundane

Jul 20 '05 #16

P: n/a
:-)

--
####################
## PH, London
####################
"Andrew Thompson" <Se********@www.invalid> wrote in message
news:1s*****************************@40tude.net...
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 20:53:37 +0000 (UTC), Philip Herlihy wrote:
<p> lends itself better to editing in WYSIWYG


WYSIWYG applies well to paper, ..or engravings
in stone, but not the internet.
..mode in editors like Dreamweaver,..


The page will not look quite the same in IE,
Lynx, Safari, Firefox or an early Netscape UA.
So WYSIWYG should actually be relabelled (in this
instance) WYSIWYGWLAIWDW (what you see is what
you get, when looking at it with dream weaver).

--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology
http://www.lensescapes.com/ Images that escape the mundane

Jul 20 '05 #17

P: n/a
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 11:29:07 +0000 (UTC), Philip Herlihy wrote:

(in reference to top-posting)
Lets keep content and presentation separate, shall we?


You can if you wish, but you might end up being the only one
appreciating your presentation or assimilating your content.

--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology
http://www.lensescapes.com/ Images that escape the mundane
Jul 20 '05 #18

P: n/a
I've one friendly and courteous encouragement to change my posting style,
and one scolding. Posting styles are a personal preference, and my
preference is as valid as the opposite view - I find top-posting more
natural and time-saving, and so do countless others. For every link to a
rant against top-posting I've seen a corresponding one bemoaning the
thought-police who want everything tidied up their way. My view is that
top-posting will become the norm eventually, and that those who howl with
protest meanwhile should find something more important to care about. It's
certainly true that editing quotes to a minimum is a courtesy, and I'll
bottom-post when joining an established discussion where that's been the
style so far. Otherwise, we live in a diverse world, and I'll vote with my
posts. If you don't like it, put me in your kill file if you care that much
about it.

Of course, what's really needed is a system which separates content from
presentation, so that folk can view threads the way they like. If there's a
newsreader out there which will all display threads as top-posted I'll
certainly try it - I vaguely dislike bottom-posting as I find it slows
things down.

Anyway, that exhausts (completely) my interest in the subject of posting
styles. Thanks to those who replied with suggestions. As this group has
diverse views on posting, I'll be doubly careful to trim quotes to the
minimum.

PH

Jul 20 '05 #19

P: n/a
You're right. I'd checked in Opera several times and thought I'd seen the
same thing, but when I view my example in Opera now it seems correct. I'd
still like to know how to get rid of those gaps though - it seems to be
asking for trouble to start using negative margin values...

--
####################
## PH, London
####################
"Spartanicus" <me@privacy.net> wrote >
It is specific to IE.


Jul 20 '05 #20

P: n/a
Nicely put - made me smile. See my other post on the subject.

--
####################
## PH, London
####################
"Andrew Thompson" <Se********@www.invalid> wrote
(in reference to top-posting)
Lets keep content and presentation separate, shall we?


You can if you wish, but you might end up being the only one
appreciating your presentation or assimilating your content.

Jul 20 '05 #21

P: n/a
*Philip Herlihy* wrote in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets:
I've one friendly and courteous encouragement to change my posting style,
and one scolding. Posting styles are a personal preference, and my
preference is as valid as the opposite view - I find top-posting more
natural and time-saving, and so do countless others. For every link to a
rant against top-posting I've seen a corresponding one bemoaning the
thought-police who want everything tidied up their way. My view is that
top-posting will become the norm eventually, and that those who howl with
protest meanwhile should find something more important to care about. It's
certainly true that editing quotes to a minimum is a courtesy, and I'll
bottom-post when joining an established discussion where that's been the
style so far. Otherwise, we live in a diverse world, and I'll vote with my
posts. If you don't like it, put me in your kill file if you care that much
about it.

[snip]

Perhaps you can see the funny side of:

A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on USENET?
--
Andrew Urquhart
- FAQ: http://www.css.nu/faq/ciwas-aFAQ.html
- Archive: http://andrewu.co.uk/r/?4 (Google Groups)
- Contact me: http://andrewu.co.uk/contact/
Jul 20 '05 #22

P: n/a
Yes, of course it's witty, but top-down isn't always the way people read
text. There are many situations in which folk want the most recent addition
to be seen first, and that's often at the top. Of course it depends on what
newsreader you use. The last time I failed to resist temptation to get into
this debate (more than a year ago) someone helpfully suggested it was more
important to avoid injudicious bulk quoting. If you get that right, the
posting style becomes much less important, I think.

There is an enhanced version of Outlook Express available which gives you
the option of giving "OE" a default bottom-posting style. I tried it for a
good period, but in the end I still preferred top-posting! If you're
prepared to give it a stab, try using OE on some of the groups at
news.microsoft.com, where top-posting is the norm. Once you got over the
initial shudders you'd find it quite natural. Mind you, I rather suspect
that a general loathing of Microsoft and everything they produce underlies
some folk's dislike of top-posting. I earn my living supporting MS
software, so I tend just to go with the flow, like the majority.

My own view is that the most annoying thing on Usenet is when folk pay more
attention to the presentation than the core issue and get all uppity about
it. You didn't do this, and neatly separated your comments on CSS and
posting into separate replies. Courteous comment is always worth a
considered reply. On the other hand, lunch seems a much more rewarding
prospect right now than banging on with religious wars over newsgroup styles
....

--
####################
## PH, London
####################
Perhaps you can see the funny side of:

A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on USENET?
--
Andrew Urquhart

Jul 20 '05 #23

P: n/a
My own conclusions:

1) Yes, it's an IE quirk, even in "standards" mode (although you can see
subtle variations between any two browsers on very many sites).

2) Mixing inline and block elements (even when set to display inline) is
probably asking for trouble.

3) I tried using an Unordered list, but this has a similar problem in IE6
(but not in Opera), see:
http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.net/CssMargins/ul.htm

4) I tried using unadorned <a> tags, picking out non-link text with a
<span>, which works consistently in both: see:
http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.ne...gins/spans.htm

Thanks to those who contributed. Any further comments still very welcome.

--
####################
## PH, London
####################
"Philip Herlihy" <fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote :

I thought I'd include simple <p> tags, and style them the same way as the
<a> tags, but I can't get it to work - I get different margins in each case.
I've reduced the situation to the essentials here:
http://philipherlihy.members.beeb.net/CssMargins/

Jul 20 '05 #24

P: n/a
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 12:08:09 +0000 (UTC), Philip Herlihy
<fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote:
I've one friendly and courteous encouragement to change my posting style,
and one scolding. Posting styles are a personal preference, and my
preference is as valid as the opposite view


.... except in this case you want to know something, and the ones who can
help you prefer conversational posting, eh?

If you're a doctor and you refer to everything by a cute toddler's word
instead of a more specific anatomic term, or you submit reports to the
NEJM without an appropriate format or construction, you won't earn the
respect of other doctors very easily. Not to compare ciwas to the NEJM but
you will see a similar phenomenon here.
Jul 20 '05 #25

P: n/a
Philip Herlihy wrote:
See my other post on the subject.


No thanks. I won't bother trying to follow the conversation when you
insist on putting the answer before the question.

*plonk*

--
Brian (remove "invalid" to email me)
http://www.tsmchughs.com/
Jul 20 '05 #26

P: n/a

"Philip Herlihy" <fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote in message
news:ci**********@sparta.btinternet.com...
I've one friendly and courteous encouragement to change my posting style,
and one scolding. Posting styles are a personal preference, and my
preference is as valid as the opposite view -
My personal preference is for comprehensibility. Do you disagree?

When each part of a person's latest contribution directly follows the
portion of the previous thread to which it relates, the flow is natural and
clear. Otherwise, as a message grows with more people's contributions, it
becomes impossible to see who is responding to what in which order. Do you
prefer that?
I find top-posting more
natural and time-saving, and so do countless others.


Natural and time-saving for you to write it. You can save even more time by
not responding at all, but that really isn't the goal, is it? It's unnatural
and ultimately opaque for those who have to read it, especially as the
thread develops and the various writers' contributions become thickly
enmeshed.

Jul 20 '05 #27

P: n/a
Harlan Messinger h.*********@comcast.net wrote:

"Philip Herlihy" <fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote in message
news:ci**********@sparta.btinternet.com...

I find top-posting more
natural and time-saving, and so do countless others.


Natural and time-saving for you to write it. You can save even more time by
not responding at all, but that really isn't the goal, is it? It's unnatural
and ultimately opaque for those who have to read it, especially as the
thread develops and the various writers' contributions become thickly
enmeshed.


And one person writes the post, but a large number read it. Which is why
the reader's convenience takes precedence.

--
eric
www.ericjarvis.co.uk
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"
Jul 20 '05 #28

P: n/a
Absolutely. But my preference for TP is precisely because I find it easier
to read threads that way (just as my email is sorted with the most recent
arrivals at the top).

I realise some people feel strongly about the subject, but do consider this:
Outlook Express has a larger installed base than any other newsreader by
several orders of magnitude worldwide, as it comes with Windows. (Of course
many only use it for email.) If News becomes more popular, then you're
likely to see many more people top-posting. There are relatively few
newsgroups which I've used (and I've been using News since 1987) where I get
these protests - in many you see a mix of TP and BP, and in very many TP is
almost universal. So, despite documents which purport to be standards, OE
is tantamount to a de-facto standard - and I happen to like it. Usenet
belongs equally to those who use it, and one person's preference is as valid
as anyone else's. I respect your preference even though I don't share it.
I have to say I find it harder to respect the self-appointed Mullahs who
howl in indignation about it. Let's disagree with courtesy, as you've done
in your post below (oops!).

That's quite enough from me on the subject.

--
####################
## PH, London
####################
"Eric Jarvis" <we*@ericjarvis.co.uk> wrote
And one person writes the post, but a large number read it. Which is why
the reader's convenience takes precedence.

Jul 20 '05 #29

P: n/a
Philip Herlihy fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com wrote:

That's quite enough from me on the subject.


Yes, you've conclusively proved your suitability for the killfile by
assuming that with a couple of minutes thinking entirely from your own
perspective and without one second of considering other people, you will
come up with a better idea than a huge number of people have managed with
intense discussion over many years. Frankly I can't be bothered dealing
with that level of stupidity and arrogance which is why I'm grateful that
I can simply tell my newsreader to ignore you for a month (or in
perpetuity if you haven't learned that you aren't a superhuman genius
around whom the entire universe revolves).

--
eric
www.ericjarvis.co.uk
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"
Jul 20 '05 #30

P: n/a
> From: Philip Herlihy

...my preference for TP is precisely because I find it easier to
read threads that way (just as my email is sorted with the most
recent arrivals at the top).


I prefer top-posting, too, and for the same reason. Nevertheless,
after lurking in c.i.w.a.* for a while, I've concluded that
bottom-slash-inline posting is the way to go here. When in Rome, do as
Caligula does, hm? :)

Jul 20 '05 #31

P: n/a
"Fast Eddie" <ne*******@newsserver.com> wrote in message
news:g-********************@comcast.com...

I prefer top-posting, too, and for the same reason. Nevertheless,
after lurking in c.i.w.a.* for a while, I've concluded that
bottom-slash-inline posting is the way to go here. When in Rome, do as
Caligula does, hm? :)


:-)

--
####################
## PH, London
####################
Jul 20 '05 #32

P: n/a

"Eric Jarvis" <we*@ericjarvis.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MP************************@news.individual.ne t...
Harlan Messinger h.*********@comcast.net wrote:

"Philip Herlihy" <fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote in message
news:ci**********@sparta.btinternet.com...

I find top-posting more
natural and time-saving, and so do countless others.


Natural and time-saving for you to write it. You can save even more time by not responding at all, but that really isn't the goal, is it? It's unnatural and ultimately opaque for those who have to read it, especially as the
thread develops and the various writers' contributions become thickly
enmeshed.


And one person writes the post, but a large number read it. Which is why
the reader's convenience takes precedence.


Even for the *writer's* sake, It *ought* to take precedence even if one is
writing a personal message to a single person! One writes to communicate,
and putting convenience over clarity only defeats that purpose.

Jul 20 '05 #33

P: n/a
No, it doesn't.

No, it isn't.

Now: can you tell me to which sentences in your message the above sentences
respond? Not without looking carefully, you can't. So don't feed us BS about
how much easier it is to read the thread when I top-post, than it would have
been had I followed my usual practice of putting my response after the
portion of the message it addresses.

"Philip Herlihy" <fo******@herlihy.eu.veil.com> wrote in message
news:ci**********@titan.btinternet.com...
Absolutely. But my preference for TP is precisely because I find it easier to read threads that way (just as my email is sorted with the most recent
arrivals at the top).

I realise some people feel strongly about the subject, but do consider this: Outlook Express has a larger installed base than any other newsreader by
several orders of magnitude worldwide, as it comes with Windows. (Of course many only use it for email.) If News becomes more popular, then you're
likely to see many more people top-posting. There are relatively few
newsgroups which I've used (and I've been using News since 1987) where I get these protests - in many you see a mix of TP and BP, and in very many TP is almost universal. So, despite documents which purport to be standards, OE
is tantamount to a de-facto standard - and I happen to like it. Usenet
belongs equally to those who use it, and one person's preference is as valid as anyone else's. I respect your preference even though I don't share it.
I have to say I find it harder to respect the self-appointed Mullahs who
howl in indignation about it. Let's disagree with courtesy, as you've done in your post below (oops!).

That's quite enough from me on the subject.

--
####################
## PH, London
####################
"Eric Jarvis" <we*@ericjarvis.co.uk> wrote
And one person writes the post, but a large number read it. Which is why
the reader's convenience takes precedence.



Jul 20 '05 #34

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.