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

Re: [css3-mediaqueries] clearer wording for 'orientation' and '*aspect-ratio' for paged media

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2008 10:55:50 -0800
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-Id: <C54522D6-9831-428F-B642-2E7545B8C683@gmail.com>
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>

Isn't "projection" considered a paged media? Maybe it would be better  
to say that:

  # The ‘height’ media feature describes the height of the targeted
  # display area of the viewport. For paged media, the terms
  # "viewports" and "page box" are equivalent.

On Dec 24, 2008, at 9:14 AM, L. David Baron wrote:

>
> We revised the wording for 'height', 'width', 'device-height', and
> 'device-width' to make it clearer how they behave in paged media.
> For example, the definition of 'height' is:
>  # The ‘height’ media feature describes the height of the targeted
>  # display area of the output device. For continuous media, this is
>  # the height of the viewport. For paged media, this is the height
>  # of the page box.
>
> I think we should make similar clarifications to 'aspect-ratio',
> 'device-aspect-ratio', and 'orientation'.  In particular, I think
> 'aspect-ratio' and 'orientation' should be like 'height' and
> 'width', while 'device-aspect-ratio' should be like 'device-height'
> and 'device-width'.
>
> It might even be good to define 'aspect-ratio' and 'orientation' in
> terms of 'width' and 'height', and define 'device-aspect-ratio' in
> terms of 'device-width' and 'device-height'.
>
> -David
>
> -- 
> L. David Baron                                 http://dbaron.org/
> Mozilla Corporation                       http://www.mozilla.com/
>
Received on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 18:56:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:18 GMT