> Unix abandoned (or never had) any conception of WYSIWYG, and probably never will. I hate it, too.
In this case, the complaint is that what you've got can't be represented by what you see. There are a couple of ways to approximately display what you see, but they're approximations. (One is wrap and the other is "off the edge of the screen".)
In a WYSIWYG, you can't represent a line longer than the screen width. This is a problem when lines matter.
That's why WYSIWYG is more accurately called "What You See Is All You Have".
In this case, the complaint is that what you've got can't be represented by what you see. There are a couple of ways to approximately display what you see, but they're approximations. (One is wrap and the other is "off the edge of the screen".)
In a WYSIWYG, you can't represent a line longer than the screen width. This is a problem when lines matter.
That's why WYSIWYG is more accurately called "What You See Is All You Have".