W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2010

Re: Defining safe areas for media devices and set top boxes

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 12:58:47 -0800
Message-Id: <27057BE0-1008-4E5F-A769-4A7602C65755@gmail.com>
Cc: João Eiras <joao-c-eiras@telecom.pt>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
To: Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com>


On Dec 6, 2010, at 12:34 PM, Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com> wrote:

> 2010/12/6 Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>:
>> 
>> What did I say that took it out of being a media query issue? I merely suggested that the same query to find devices with an unsafe zone would also find devices with interlacing. So I was wrong; it also finds people who are using the wrong cable. Right? So you want a new query term that not only supports a dying technology (CRTs), but also inappropriate yet still somewhat workable hardware set-ups.
>> 
> 
> "Using the wrong cable" does not imply CRT's.

I know. CRTs are one case where there is an unsafe area, and bad cabling to an HDTV is another. 

> Some people can be
> misinformed and they might think that a, say, Super VGA must be used
> even when told that they must use a digital cable. Sometimes it is
> just impossible to convince them and then the cable is buried into a
> wall. You cannot just assume the correct digital cables are always
> used.

Right. I understand. My point remains. How important is it have a special media query whose purpose is to support issues related to regrettable cabling choices? I am willing to be convinced it is important if, say, this is extremely common and expected to stay common for years. But so far I am not convinced. 

BTW, is the unsafe area issue present when using a Super VGA cable too? I thought from the previous post thatbit was mostly about RCA cables. 
Received on Monday, 6 December 2010 20:59:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:34 GMT