W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2004

RE: [css3-page] LCWD issue 29 -- [29] Section 8

From: Ernest Cline <ernestcline@mindspring.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 23:22:30 -0500
Message-ID: <410-2200414842230281@mindspring.com>
To: "BIGELOW,JIM (HP-Boise,ex1)" <jim.bigelow@hp.com>, www-style@w3.org




> [Original Message]
> From: BIGELOW,JIM (HP-Boise,ex1) <jim.bigelow@hp.com>
> To: <www-style@w3.org>; <ernestcline@mindspring.com>
> Date: 1/7/2004 8:32:42 PM
> Subject: RE: [css3-page] LCWD issue 29 --  [29] Section 8
>
> Ernest,
>
> I agree that <angle> in the range of 0 to 260 is preferable to <integer>.
I
> look to profiles such as the CSS Print Profile for low cost printers to
> simplify the range to 0, 90, 270.  Starting at the full range and allowing
> capable printers to implement to their ability seems like a good idea to
me.

Just to be clear, I was referring to the <angle> value type from 
CSS3 Values [1] not some new definition of <angle> that would allow
only degrees.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-css3-values-20010713/#angles
Received on Wednesday, 7 January 2004 23:22:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:25 GMT