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

Re: Dreams aloud

From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 09:18:30 -0700
Message-ID: <000601c45df4$b79b53f0$0201a8c0@ATHLON>
To: <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
Cc: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, <www-style@w3.org>

> Lachlan Hunt
> > Actually the idea is deeper on second look:
> >
> > width: 100px;
> > width: 50% (min:20px, max:100px);
>
>    This idea is reasonable, but the syntax is not.  I believe something
> equivelant has been discussed previously.  min() and max() functions,
> which could be introduced when a calc() function is introduced would
> provide much more flexibility.
>

Traditionally min(something1, something2) means minimum from this values.
So this notation will confuse those who knows e.g. JavaScript where min is
function.
In our case min is not a function but a parameter-constrain.

Min/max constraints is a property of relative unit values like em,ex,%,%%.
Min/max are not independent entities.

font-size: 3em (min:10pt, max:20pt);

Choices are:
1)
width: 50% (min:20px, max:100px)
here 50% is a function name and at the same time its main value.
It calculates as occurs calculation of percentage - in runtime. That is main
difference
with calc() approach - it calculates once.

Also we may consider different brackets like
50% [min:20px, max:100px]
50% {min:20px, max:100px}

For clearnes of formal grammatic/syntax rules "( ... )" is better.

Try to imagine that in document having 5 independent styles applied someone
set e.g.  p{ min-width:50%; max-width:20em } at the very first sheet.

Nightmare.


Andrew Fedoniouk.
http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Tuesday, 29 June 2004 12:19:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:30 GMT