사용자:Altostratus/번역 중/개행시 주의점

위키백과에서 편집시에 개행을 두 번 정도 한다면 새 문단이 생성되며 이는 문서를 읽기 편하게 하기 위해 사용합니다. 이 문서에서는 문서 편집시에 개행을 두 번 하는 것이 아닌 한 번 하는 것에 대해 설명하고자 합니다.

개행을 한 번만 하면 실제로 문장이 개행되지 않습니다. 문장이 한 번 개행되었다는 걸 표시하고 싶으시다면 <br> 태그를 사용하세요. 개행을 한 번만 하는 것은 실제로 이러한 효과를 나타냅니다: Within a list, a single line break starts either the next item or a new paragraph; within an indentation, a single line break aborts the indentation and starts a new paragraph. Formatting instructions for bold and italics as well as links do not span line breaks (this is intentional, so that authors do not accidentally turn an entire paragraph into a link etc.).

그럼에도 불구하고, 일부 편집자들은 문서 편집 시에 여러 가지 이유로 개행을 한 번만 합니다; others oppose this practice. 독자 입장에서는 문서 소스에 개행을 한 번만 해도 실제로 아무런 효과가 나타나지 않기 때문에 별로 신경 쓸 필요가 없습니다. The two positions are presented below. See the discussion page for the current head count for each position.

개행할 때 한 줄만 개행하지 마세요편집

고려해야 할 규칙들 중 하나:

문서 편집시에 문단내에 개행을 여러번 시키지 마세요. 그 이유로는:

  • 줄이 한 번 개행되어 있는 문단을 들여쓰기 하고 싶으시다면 먼저 개행되어 있는 것 부터 제거하세요.
  • If you want to make a list item out of a paragraph that includes single line breaks, you first have to remove them.
  • If you want to turn a phrase that contains a line break into a link, or format it in bold or italics, 먼저 개행되어 있는 것부터 제거해야합니다.
  • Text is no longer wrapped at the window edge of the text entry area, but where the author chose to make the linebreak. Thus, there will be a lot of whitespace within a paragraph, which may be considered a waste of space and visually distracting.
  • The appearance of the article source text becomes different from the appearance of the rendered output; it therefore becomes harder to find a sentence of the rendered output in the source text. Since writers often think in terms of paragraphs, it makes sense to organize the text that way.
  • Single line breaks in source texts may confuse new editors, who may think they are there for a special reason, and avoid editing these paragraphs because they fear to break something.

Proponents of line breaks within paragraphs claim that they make diffs (the reports showing the differences between two revisions of an article) easier to read. The diff feature highlights the changes within each line break delimited block of text and provides unchanged text for additional context up to the third line break below and above that text. This usually means that it highlights the entire paragraph, and shows one paragraph above and below it for context. The changed characters are separately highlighted from the changed blocks in a different color.

It is hard to see how individual line breaks help in any way in that comparison, since their only effect will be to reduce the amount of context provided when a line is changed. In fact, arbitrarily entered line breaks prevent the software from working correctly: instead of providing the context of a full paragraph, it only shows changes in individual lines of text, respecting not even sentence boundaries.

One undeniable advantage of line breaks within paragraphs is that many Unix editors do not handle long lines well – they can either wrap characters at the screen boundary, wrap words at a fixed length, or not wrap at all. However, by this logic, line breaks would have to be entered at a fixed width, such as 80 characters, something which most proponents of the "use single line breaks" rule do not want and which, as seen above, completely breaks the diff context feature. Just inserting line breaks into some paragraphs will not make them easier to edit with these tools. Arguably, those who use editors which cannot handle long lines properly should just get better ones. Microsoft Notepad has had this functionality since its very first version, Gedit has it, vi supports it with the "set lbr" option, and every major graphical web browser has proper word wrapping even on Unix platforms.