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

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

From: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 05:23:14 +1100
Cc: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, www-style@w3.org
Message-Id: <333D8161-697D-4ED7-BFC6-20314D07BC09@apple.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>


On 04/12/2008, at 5:11 AM, fantasai wrote:

> Dean Jackson wrote:
>> This is a good point. I'm not sure what the cost of introducing a new
>> type for these queries is compared to defining the precision to be
>> used.
>
> It's not really a new type. The spec defines it that way, and if it's
> objectionable I think an argument could be made for an editorial  
> change
> there, but syntactically it's really two integers separated by a  
> slash.
> We do use slash as a separator in some property values in CSS.

But this isn't a property value.

>> The way I see it is that authors probably will always use the min/max
>> style over the aspect-ratio queries anyway. For example, a consumer
>> "16:9" device can refer to both 1280x720 and 1366x768, but the second
>> does not equal 16:9 (it's very close, but by the spec's definition
>> would fail the query). What the author will probably want is a layout
>> that works for viewports around that ratio.
>> In your example, IMO the author would more likely write something  
>> like:
>>  (min-aspect-ratio: [something below 4:3]) and
>>  (max-aspect-ratio: [something above 4:3 but not above the 16:9  
>> switch])
>
> See also
>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2007Aug/0101.html

I don't like this suggestion very much. There already is a solution
(using min and max). Adding a fudge factor for equality seems to  
indicate
a flaw in the original technology.

Furthermore, it doesn't really address the use case of multiple
devices with a range of aspect ratios (4:3 old skool, 480:320 iphone,
1280x720 tv, 1920:1200 lots of common lcd displays). Basically, you
are better off writing a layout for an approximate ratio, not trying
to pick an exact one because you never know what devices are coming
out. Hence min and max.

Dean
Received on Wednesday, 3 December 2008 18:23:57 GMT

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