- From: Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kennyluck@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 00:26:46 +0800
- To: John Hax <johnhax@gmail.com>
- CC: W3C HTML5 中文興趣小組 <public-html-ig-zh@w3.org>
(Cc -www-style +public-html-ig-zh) Hax, (12/02/09 18:36), Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu wrote: >> 2. Resolution Units: the <resolution> type >> >> # Note that due to the 1:96 fixed ratio of CSS ‘in’ to CSS ‘px’, ‘1dppx’ >> # is equivalent to ‘96dpi’. This corresponds to the default resolution >> # of images displayed in CSS: see ‘image-resolution’. >> >> A friend of mime (John Hax in the Cc list) complains about this and he >> seems to think CSS2.1 Issue 149（px vs. pt）[1] should be resolved in >> favor of the pt-unit proposal (making only 'pt' physical). > > The WG resolved that issue already, and I agree with it and won't > revisit it for Images. I recommend reviewing the (lengthy) thread > about the subject from last year, and if you still disagree, raising > the issue with the WG in the context of the Values & Units spec, which > is the current defining spec for the px unit. > > [省略] > > Please let me know if these resolutions are acceptable. 這個議題，現在已經紀錄成 CSS3 Images 徵集評論放置（disposition of comments）[1]的議題 18： # Issue 18. # Summary: Define 'dpi' and 'dpcm' in terms of the real physical # units, not the CSS units # From: Kenny Lu # Comment: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb # /0408.html # Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb # /0430.html # Closed: Rejected # Verified: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20120222#l-80 總之 Tab 誤會成這是我的評論了，總之之後我會跟他講清楚。評論的回應是 Rejected，理由是討論太多次還有不在規範的範疇。現在我想請你， 1. 跟我講你接不接受這個回應（W3C 流程應對） Tab 是講你可以最少說 Accept 或 Reject。我是建議你 Accept，不是說我認為 CSS 應該捨去物理長度（我對這個議題不是很了解），不過我也認為這個不是 CSS3 Images 的範疇，而是 CSS3 Values&Units 的。 2. 跟我講你的名稱想紀錄成什麼 John Hax？贺师俊？ 3. 幫我看看 Summary 寫的對不對 你當初只回應了兩三行，我也不太清楚你想的是不是 Tab 寫的那個意思。 另外，假如你想收回這個評論我也可以幫你講。你三天不回信給我，我就請 Tab 把 'From' 改成 '贺师俊'，'Closed' 改成 'Out of Scope'，至少就後來的信看 來你的確不是特別針對 CSS3 Images 這個模組而是 CSS 物理長度這麼問題... (12/02/07 23:26), Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu wrote: > (12/02/07 5:50), John Hax wrote: >> 此draft里提到“the 1:96 fixed ratio of CSS ‘in’ to CSS >> ‘px’”。我知道现在移动浏览器都是如此，导致绝对长度如in/cm等都不绝对 >> 了。但是这不是一个错误的行为吗？ > > 這個問題已經已經討論到爛掉了，請參考以下討論串（都非常長）： > *《Making pt a non-physical unit》[2] > *《[CSS21] 4.3.2 Lengths (reference pixel?) 》[3] > *《User Agents Do Not Implement Absolute Length Units, Places > Responsive Design in Jeopardy》[4] 再來一個新的 * 《[css3-values] Physical length units 》[5] [1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/lc-issues-1 [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Jan/thread#msg58 [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Dec/thread#msg204 [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Oct/thread#msg145 [5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb/thread#msg641 此致 Kenny
Received on Monday, 27 February 2012 16:27:16 UTC