• Type: Bug
    • Status: Resolved
    • Priority: P3
    • Resolution: Duplicate
    • Affects Version/s: 8
    • Fix Version/s: 8
    • Component/s: tools
    • Labels:


      From javadoc-dev:

      I have been working on javadoc for the JDK 8 lambda streams feature and ran across some interesting quirks in the current default javadoc css.

      We have been using the construction


      for block examples. We add the {@code} to the normal <pre> block to avoid having to use html entities within the sample to escape the "&" and "<" characters. This makes the examples easier to read in the original source file.

      The formatting of a <pre> block and a <pre>{@code block is slightly different as a result relative sizing and nesting.

      The <pre> tag sets the font-size to 1.3em (stylesheet.css, line 31)

      The <code> tag (emitted by {@code}) sets the font-size to 1.2em (stylesheet.css, line 55)

      When nested the effective size is default * body (76%) * 1.3 (pre) * 1.2 (code).

      It would be nice if {@code} nested inside <pre> didn't increase the size. Using relative sizes is generally going to be weird whenever nesting occurs especially if it can occur in more than one order.

      Could <pre> and <code> be made to use the same size?

      Might it be better to use "<pre>{@literal ... " than "<pre>{@code ..." as {@literal doesn't add any styles?

      Out of curiosity:

      - Why is the default body size 76% of the default text size? The 100% size is supposed the user's comfortable reading size. Other than for "fine print" why would we want to force a size smaller than that?
      - An explicit font selection is made for body copy but none is made for code/pre text. Why not? Choosing a code font would allow better matching of the size of the body copy and mono space text. It would appear that for Arial/Courier that a 1.05em ratio is somewhat better than the 1.2em currently used.




          Issue Links



              • Assignee:
                bpatel Bhavesh Patel (Inactive)
                jjg Jonathan Gibbons
              • Votes:
                0 Vote for this issue
                4 Start watching this issue


                • Created: