This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Move to non-breaking space.
--Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley talk contrib 20:13, 2005 May 20 (UTC)
How can we make strings of kanji or other Asian characters non-breaking? That is, how can we prevent the browser from breaking between characters at the end of a line? I've tried using zero-width non-breaking spaces (), but it doesn't appear to work. I am cross-posting this from Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles). Dforest 06:45, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
I just added the entry for EBCDIC in the Encodings section. I only checked that it was indeed 0x41 in CCSIDs 037, 285, and 500. Someone more knowledgeable in EBCDIC than I should check the other varients. If someone could site an authoritative source, that would be even better. Also, I'm not sure that it is indeed called a 'No-Break Space' in EBCDIC.
Talk about making a simple subject complicated. What's with the introduction to this article? What's a RAJA? And why would you want to put nbsps in the middle of a word like that? I'd suggest using an example of two units that should always be kept together, e.g. the two parts of a phone number with area code (in the UK style, which uses a space to separate them, not the US style which I believe uses a hyphen?). JulesH 10:18, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
I have encountered a problem with non-breaking spaces at the Wikipedia Manual of Style. See here for a presentation of the difficulty, and a kludge solution. Has anyone got a better solution? Please post any suggestions at that location. – Noetica 02:09, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
It seems like the ALT+0160 keystroke works from everywhere in Windows not only for MS PowerPoint © —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.190.208.38 (talk) 08:31, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Weak Oppose Although I've never heard of a "hard space" it does not appear to be the same thing as a non-breaking space. Also, these 2 pages were created by the same editor within minutes of each other so that editor must have intended some distinction (though I'm not really sure what -- find those original versions here and here.) Perhaps ((distinguish)) tags should be added to the top of each page to indicate that there is supposed to be a distinction. Ewlyahoocom 05:39, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Not the same thing -- nbsp is a control character and is a way to achieve hard space, but not necessarily vice-versa. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.10.60.100 (talk) 18:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Strong support If there is a difference, it is one to which the great majority of users and editors are utterly indifferent. Merge, in everyone's interest.– Noetica♬♩ Talk 06:04, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Support By all means merge, but be sure to retain the title "Non-breaking_space" since nbsp seems much more common than "hard break". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pcp071098 (talk • contribs) 04:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Merge. Although different, they are often used interchangably and therefore should only be in one article. However, make sure that the difference in definition is highlighted and make sure that the article is found from searches on either term.Aristocrates 20:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Both articles clearly discuss the same topic but currently have fantasy titles and should be merged into one called no-break space, which has been the well-established technical term for this graphic character for more than a quarter century. Markus Kuhn (talk) 10:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Support, but the knowledge existent in the deleted page should be included in the aggregating page. They aren't exactly the same thing, but they're similar enough not to justify a different page, IMO — yet, I believe a small section should distinguish them. --portugal (talk) 00:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Strong Oppose -- 'hard space' is a technical mechanism for achieving a non-breaking space, but is not identical. Technical approximations are not the same as intended theoretical ideals. Hard space should definitely link to Non-breaking space, or potentially link to a technical hardspace-specific subsection, but they are not the same. Saltation (talk) 21:34, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
A markup proposal has been developed which will be of interest to editors here. There is also current discussion at WT:MOS (see the link at the top of the proposal).
See a full draft of the proposal |
---|
|
– Noetica♬♩ Talk 22:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
to make a NBSP in GoLive: Press Shift+spacebar (Windows) or Option+spacebar (Mac OS).208.125.235.35 (talk) 18:41, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
The character of interest here has been called in all the coded character-set standards for the last quarter century the "no-break space" and is commonly abbreviated as NBSP (refs: ISO 8859, ISO 10646, Unicode, all the ECMA character-set standards, and two decades of literature on the subject). Can we please stick exactly to this well-established well-defined unambiguous technical term, and not muddy the waters by introducing lots of new fantasy terminology, such as "non-breaking space" or "hard space"? Thanks! Markus Kuhn (talk) 10:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I propose to move this page to no-break space, which is how this character is called in ISO 8859, ISO 10646, Unicode, all the ECMA character-set standards, and two decades of literature on the subject. Markus Kuhn (talk) 13:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I just can't see why the thin space would not be non-breaking (sorry for the double negative), and that consequently someone had to come up with a "NARROW NO-BREAK SPACE" (U+202F) version. If you think about it for a moment,
should be non-breaking, else it does only half of its job. --Jerome Potts (talk) 22:06, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
This article says, "In HTML, a non-breaking space is created by replacing the space with ." That is not the only way of doing it. You can also just insert the Unicode character directly in the page, if your editor supports your target Unicode encoding method (usually UTF-8 for Roman alphabet scripts). This saves typing and uses 4 fewer bytes. On the other hand, it makes the encoding harder to understand, because visually a non-breaking space looks like a normal space. Bostoner (talk) 19:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
I have removed the sentences "Non-breaking space can also be used to automatically change formatting in a document. This is useful for things like class plans and recipe files where the description of a cell or line may be different from the actual text or title" because it is vague and ambiguous, and provides no clear information. Romit3 (talk) 22:34, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
The chart currently says "Not available" for ASCII. Alt code "Alt 255", which enters a hexadecimal "FF", works as a non-breaking space in Wikitext on my display - isn't this considered to be an ASCII function? Or does its display depend on the operating system? I'm using Windows XP. Milkunderwood (talk) 06:29, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Looking back now at earlier edits, I see that last year another editor had entered "0160" as a different ASCII code for a non-breaking space, but was reverted back to "Not available". This also works as an alt code, so why the insistence on maintaining "Not available" for ASCII in the chart? I suppose the question is whether hex FF is universally interpreted as a non-breaking space across different operating systems. Even if not, for MS DOS and DOS-based Windows, "Not available" is simply untrue. (255 is the actual call for FF; 0160 is an HTML workaround.) Milkunderwood (talk) 20:20, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Currently, the article mentions the use of a non-breaking space before double punctuation specifically in Canadian French, whereas the parallel article in the French Wikipedia mentions it for French French, and in fact states Canadian French only employs it for a more limited set of punctuation. I tend to trust the French article on this one; can someone verify this and/or edit the article accordingly? 2A02:8109:9200:7F58:4A9:E0F6:B6D9:1FD0 (talk) 03:35, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
@Daniel G., Macrakis, and Matthiaspaul: As recent editors of this article, you may be able to help with the too-wide nbsp problem, which exists as of 21 June 2022[update] at the ((As of)) page. Please discuss this directly at Template talk:As of#Template introduces too much space? if you can help. Boud (talk) 17:40, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
I'm sure that many users, like me, copy and paste, into documents we're writing, non-keyboard symbols from the respective Wikipedia Infoboxes. Thus, I'll go to the Section sign article if I need a §, to Prime (symbol) when mentioning a 10′ pole, to Multiplication sign for 2×4 lumber etc. As I have found out to my sorrow. this does not work smoothly for the no-break space, as the light blue color gets carried along with the space. I am accordingly warning others not to try this; instead, they should consult Non-breaking space § Keyboard entry methods for alternatives. Peter Brown (talk) 18:20, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Use of ′ and ″ symbols violates MOS:NUM so is not provided. I think that Peter was just illustrating his point. But that aside, may I take it that you agree with the principle I have stated? --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:50, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
The Non-breaking space page says (under narrow no-break space) "Due to the tighter binding of value and unit as a continuous visual element NNBSP is recommended for usage in the SI-standard.[6]".
However, the linked document (which is a NIST interpretation of the SI standard, not the SI standard itself) makes no reference to spaces between numbers and units (non-breaking or otherwise). The only references to spaces in that document are related to those between units and prefixes (and no reference to non-breaking spaces is present). The SI standard itself (https://www.bipm.org/documents/20126/41483022/SI-Brochure-9-EN.pdf) references spaces but doesn't specify whether they're non-breaking, narrow or wide.
Therefore, I think this comment is hard to justify. It seems a sensible thing to do, but needs a valid reference to back it up. TigerTIG (talk) 11:07, 12 June 2024 (UTC)