Re: Unit omission with zero length

Henri Sivonen wrote:
> 
>  From http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-values/#lengths :
> "After the '0' length, the unit identifier is optional."
> 
> Please be more explicit about the distinction between the literal string 
> "0" and the number evaluating to zero ("0.0", "00", ".0", etc.).
> 
> I now suppose that the unit identifier is optional only with the literal 
> string "0", but initially, I read less carefully and thought that the 
> unit identifier was optional with anything evaluating to zero.

Please stop reading "carefully," you're not a computer :-)

What would you rather pay, 0 cents or 0.00 Euro? Which is longer, 0 cm, 
0.0 cm or 0.0000 cm?

[Answers: if you're a computer scientist, "0.0000 cm" is the longest by 
several bytes; if you're a physicist, 0 is the least precise, so it is 
potentially the longest; if you're a normal user of CSS: "Huh, are you 
pulling my leg?"]



Bert
-- 
   Bert Bos                                ( W 3 C ) http://www.w3.org/
   http://www.w3.org/people/bos                               W3C/ERCIM
   bert@w3.org                             2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93
   +33 (0)4 92 38 76 92            06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France

Received on Saturday, 17 November 2007 17:08:02 UTC