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

Re: auto units versus 'auto' value, was Re: vertical-align

From: Justin Wood <jw6057@bacon.qcc.mass.edu>
Date: Fri, 21 May 2004 13:57:26 -0400
Message-ID: <40AE4306.5000806@bacon.qcc.mass.edu>
To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Cc: "Anne van Kesteren (fora)" <fora@annevankesteren.nl>, W3C Style List <www-style@w3.org>

Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:

>Did you say <length>? :)
>
>To find the difference what is allowed in 'font-size' and what is allowed in
>e.g. 'margin', what is <length> and how it is different from <percent> and
>auto please read this carefuly:
>http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/fonts.html#font-size-props
>http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/box.html#value-def-margin-width
>
>(Am I talking with Turing machine?)
>
>Andrew Fedoniouk.
>http://terrainformatica.com
>
>
>
>  
>
>>>>And that is exactly why your proposal doesn't make sense ;-)
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Set of allowed values for 'font-size' attribute and e.g. for 'width'
>>>attribute are already not equal.
>>>
>>>Following your logic 'auto' value should be considered as wrong
>>>because it cannot be applied to font-size.
>>>      
>>>
>>No you are wrong. '<length>' is allowed both on 'font-size' and 'width'
>>and there are no restrictions on things that are defined within
>>'<length>' like it should.
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Anne, sorry, but I cannot understand your logic here.
>>>      
>>>
>>Then reread everything inside the specification if you haven't done
>>    
>>
>already.
>  
>
>>    
>>
>>>Just consider 'auto' not as only value but as a units name. These
>>>'auto' units has not only 'auto' (100%%) value but also 80auto
>>>(80%%), etc.
>>>      
>>>
>>'auto' is a value, not a unit. A unit is part of a value.
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Just imagine that instead of
>>>
>>><length>  Specifies a fixed width. .... auto         See the section
>>>.....
>>>
>>>you will see
>>>
>>><length>  Specifies a fixed width. .... <auto>     See the section
>>>describing auto units.....
>>>
>>>Is this not clear?
>>>      
>>>
>>This is clear, but it doesn't make sense, since '%%' would be part of
>>'<length>'.
>>
>>
>>--
>>  Anne van Kesteren
>>  <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>
Sorry but I just read those two linked docs, and I don't see how that is 
a counter to anne's comment

The fact that %% is a unit and not a keyword, explicitly affects it to 
<Length>, when in fact we can't use %% with font-size since it doesnt 
make sense, is not a solution, forcing a change from auto to an <auto> 
is not feasable in that sense either since, the UNIT '%%' will continue 
to be part of <LENGTH>

Without trying to sound offensive, it does sound like you skimmed the 
majority of the spec and are reading parts here and there and trying to 
tell us (those who have) repeatedly that %% can work, when we keep 
telling you it can't, as far as I am concerned, I am no longer 
participating in this conversation on that regard.

~Justin Wood
Received on Friday, 21 May 2004 13:58:48 GMT

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