W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2007

Re: [css3-mediaqueries] Rounding

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 18:53:21 -0400
Message-ID: <46CB6CE1.70204@inkedblade.net>
To: Christoph Päper <christoph.paeper@crissov.de>
CC: www-style CSS <www-style@w3.org>

Christoph Päper wrote:
> 
> fantasai:
>> Fuzzy Matching
> 
> I just proposed keywords (and floats) for this. Specified inexact 
> matches are the more universal approach, though.
> 
>>     * For 'min-aspect-ratio' and 'max-aspect-ratio', if the actual
>>       aspect ratio is between 1/12 and 12/1 then the UA may round
>>       the actual aspect ratio to the nearest of:
> 
> What is the reason for choosing 12? Pretty much every aspect ratio ever 
> used in practice lies between 0.08(3) and 12, unless I'm missing something.

To come up with a list of discrete aspect ratios I needed a limit.
I figured most denominators in use would fall between 1 and 12, so
I drew the limit between 1/12 and 12/1. Rounding a ratio of 20/1
to 12/1, the nearest in the list, would be silly.

>>         * the nominal ratio of any paper size listed in tables 3-8
>>           of [PWGMSN] in either portrait or landscape orientation
>>         * any ratio {1..(2N-1)}/N where N ∈ {1..12}[1]
>>         * the inverse of the above
> 
> Portrait already is the inverse of landscape.

Hm, I meant that to apply only to the second rule. :)

>>   - Changing 5% to some other %
> 
> I heard rumours, which might well be wrong, that EICTA chose a 7% margin 
> for the requirements of their HD Ready logo to allow 17:9 and 15:9 
> display of 16:9 data. In my opinion, that is too fuzzy a match; perhaps 
> even 5% is too much.


What would you suggest?

~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2007 22:53:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:52 GMT