As a tiny example, in my writing (instructions as condensed and inline as possible), the whole source of p4 is visible in one glance in a Notepad++ half-window, with another (say p0) in the “Other View”, enabling direct, instant, safe and reliable comparison; in your “new-fashioned code” (one single instruction by line, making the source more vertical) this is impossible…
No. I (sometimes) use a real text editor. It’s called vim. It has this cool function in it called :diffs where it will highlight differences between two or more documents, and you can tell it whether to care about newlines or not (by default, it ignores them). Apparently some of the lesser graphical editors do this too : ) As you scroll one file, the other file autoscrolls (again seems default in my vim… you can also turn this off). So a little scrolling doesn’t hurt, plus it’s possible my screen is taller than yours (I can see both our codes in a half-window either way).
I don’t mind HTML all done in one big long line for serving on the web, but if it’s code I’m maintaining or using to show someone something, I’ll use my usual indentation and newlines etc. Not that I found your code unreadable, it was fine.
which IMO is one of the reasons why, contradicting the “(with NO border)”, you inadvertently dropped the “frameBorder=0”.
It wasn’t inadvertent. When I had done the rewritten version, I removed presentational markup from the code, because it causes global epidemics of Mad Cow disease and Kenny G music. Instead, I used CSS. iframe {border: 0;} works, or in the case of the updated code,
#navext {
display: block;
width: 200px;
height: 300px;
margin: 0 8px 8px 0;
padding: 5px;
[b] border: 0;[/b]
}
Since your borders are part of a demo and are sometimes there and sometimes not, I’d prolly do it as a class that specifically existed for borders/no borders instead of the id since all the iframes have the id… but I only did a redo of #4, Aeronautics.
