[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Well, Word is quite happy to break a line at the "No Width Optional Break,"
so it works for me (though I rarely use it). And I have always wondered
whether the break would make the URL nonclickable (if it were clickable);
what you quoted suggested to me that it would not (in the same mysterious
way that wrapped URLs in these NG posts can still be clickable). Obviously,
I haven't wondered enough to bother to test it. g

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA

"Klaus Linke" wrote in message
...
"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:
I remembered that Word doesn't insert the actual "zero width space," but I
can never remember the Unicode numbers for these things, much less the
rationale of them. I figured you'd come along behind me and clean up the
mess. g

There wasn't anything wrong with what you wrote.

I'm no expert, just trying to guess how things should be from the Unicode
documentation I quoted :-)

But now that I read the distinction, I'm wondering, in the case of a URL,
wouldn't you want the space NOT to be considered a word boundary--that
is, the entire URL is a single word?

From what I understand, a word boundary (in the Unicode Standard) is
pretty much by definition a place where you can have a line break.
It is something notoriously ambiguous though. Even inside Word, for
example, VBA has a one idea of what a "word" is, "Tools Word count" has
another (arriving at a different word count for the same text).

Klaus