Bug in Preformatted Text???

[grunchy]

Hi,

For my job I wanted to include Tiddlers with some RFCs. I need only a
few ones and yes, I know this is not micro-content anymore.
Nevertheless, seemed to be the most comfortable way...

I put the text of those RFCs in {{{ }}} with proper newlines. Already
the second tiddler did not work anymore. You can easily try the same:
use RFC 791 (IP) in one tiddler and RFC 768 (UDP) in a second one and
you will immediately see the problem.

Is there a known limitation? Or a known bug?

br
Michael

[Måns]

Hi Michael

This issue has been discussed several times - and I haven't found a
convincing solution yet.

http://groups.google.com/group/TiddlyWiki/browse_thread/thread/18ff186ac7df0c80
http://groups.google.com/group/TiddlyWiki/browse_thread/thread/48ceae910e804215/4c612a2797a0f483?lnk=gst&q=daveg&rnum=6#4c612a2797a0f483
http://groups.google.dk/group/tiddlywiki/browse_thread/thread/4017cc1aac25a5d5/f4060b4cba1af8f3?hl=da&lnk=gst&q=monospace#f4060b4cba1af8f3

I looked at http://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide.html
And it seems to me that you can make good use of wikisyntax (bullets
and indents etc) for RFCs - so I made a quick workaround - maybe this
will work for you:

Put:
div[tags~="mono"].tiddler .viewer {
font-family: 'Courier New', Courier;
font-size:16px;
line-height:20px;
}

into your StyleSheet tiddler and tag every RFC tiddler with mono...
You can tweak the code in many directions, defining background color,
border, change font-size and line-height etc etc..

Regards Måns Mårtensson

[FND]

> Is there a known limitation? Or a known bug?

After quite a bit of fiddling, it turns out RFC 768[1] has a trailing
form feed character (^L). If you remove this (invisible) character after
"Postel [page 3]" at the end, it should work.

TiddlyWiki's formatter should probably not get confused by this. I'll
raise a ticket.

By the way, it would be helpful if you could include relevant
information like the RFC link or even a test case[2] next time.


-- F.


[1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc768.txt
[2] http://tiddlywiki.org/wiki/Troubleshooting

[Tobias Beer]

As for all those people in the unknown...

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/RFC

Which one is it?

Tobias.

On 24 Nov., 22:32, grunchy <grun...@web.de> wrote:

[FND]

> As for all those people in the unknown...
> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/RFC
> Which one is it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Request_for_Comments

"""
Our intent was only to encourage others to chime in, but I worried we
might sound as though we were making official decisions or asserting
authority.
[...]
Still fearful of sounding presumptuous, I labeled the note a "Request
for Comments."
"""
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/07/opinion/07crocker.html


-- F.