- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 16:29:23 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Afternoon <afternoon@uk2.net>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, 4 Jul 2003, Afternoon wrote:
>>
>> It's not a reason to block an addition that can't yet be done, but it
>> is a reason to add an addition that _can_ be done.
>>
>> In the former case, authors will use the feature to the detriment of
>> legacy browsers.
>>
>> In the latter case, given the two options (work in all browsers, work
>> just in the new browsers) they'll use the backwards-compatible option.
>
> But if they were going to do that, wouldn't they already be doing that
> now? My point was that people aren't using the feature currently
> because it's obfuscated and logical only to a browser programmer.
Many people using margin: auto for centering. It is not an obscure
feature, indeed it appears in several CSS FAQs and Wikis, and while I
agree it is not intuitive, it is not complicated either.
> In addition, it isn't a fraction as useful to center a block which has
> to have a fixed width as it is to center the block with width:intrinsic,
> so it won't be in widespread use until CSS3 anyway.
I'm not sure how that is relevant. The two features are distinct; one is
possible now, the other is not.
Note that the WG _has_ considered adding simpler ways of doing some
features that are technically currently possible, when the gain is great.
For example, it is technically possible to do vertical centering [1], but
there are proposals that would make it a lot simpler ('position:center').
[1] http://www.damowmow.com/playground/demos/centering/
--
Ian Hickson )\._.,--....,'``. fL
"meow" /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
http://index.hixie.ch/ `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 5 July 2003 19:28:59 UTC