W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2011

Re: background-print

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:42:32 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDD2hS5TzFnc0BBU4JHvOogHO2Q1ryGW=BeQG3jjjZvY-Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 5:28 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> On 08/10/2011 04:25 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>
>> At the f2f I briefly discussed background printing at the end of
>> Tuesday.  (minutes:
>> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Aug/0178.html>,
>> thread:<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jul/0341.html>).
>>
>> I had asked people to chime in, but not many people did.  Florian
>> commented that he was in the camp that thought this should be
>> triggered simply by the print stylesheet setting values.  (This has
>> flaws, both purity-wise and technical*.)  Before the f2f, Christoph
>> Päper argued similarly.  Fantasai said that she thought making the
>> property per-element was overkill, but otherwise seemed supportive.
>
> No, I'm more in Florian's camp, really. (And have a patch to implement
> that in Gecko already.)

That approach has either technical or purity-based flaws.

If you do it properly, and allow any "background" that applies during
print-time to apply, you'll massively change behavior, since any
stylesheets without an explicit @media attribute are assumed to be
"all".

If you do it hackily, so that 'background' is only honored if it
appears in a stylesheet specifically linked with media="print", you're
introducing novel and imo really ugly behavior into the platform.
This is akin to Opera's behavior in fullscreen being based off the
presence or absence of a stylesheet with media=projection in the page,
which is really nasty.

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 11 August 2011 00:43:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:43 GMT