W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2008

Re: [css3-mediaqueries] feedback on device-aspect-ratio, aspect-ratio and orientation

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 11:33:51 +0100
To: "Dean Jackson" <dino@apple.com>, "Bert Bos" <bert@w3.org>
Cc: Www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.ulk0ypyh64w2qv@annevk-t60.oslo.opera.com>

On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 19:31:32 +0100, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote:
> We are interested in these features, but request changes.
>
> aspect-ratio and device-aspect-ratio
> ------------
>
> We think these should take a number (float) rather than a ratio (defined  
> as a string). While ratio gives the same result it doesn't seem worth  
> introducing a new type just for these queries.
>
> Also, the spec should be clear wether or not it is talking about the  
> physical dimensions (and, as such, give an example without square  
> pixels).

This syntax has been stable for over six and half year (for  
device-aspect-ratio). Do we really want to fiddle with that? (There are  
two implementations too.)


If we do anything with these features I'd rather drop them completely at  
this point as I still haven't heard a convincing use case for them (other  
than the one orientation addresses).


> orientation
> -----------
>
> We think this should be defined using an angle and allow min/max  
> prefixes. The spec can say that an implementation should report the  
> angle to the best of its ability.

What's the use case for that?


(My apologies for the belated reply, I've been climbing mountains and did  
some travelling for Opera not related to my main job.)


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Wednesday, 3 December 2008 10:34:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:17 GMT