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

Re: [css3-gcpm] Printing backgrounds (thread reboot)

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 14:34:36 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDCToLh-yes9Ha=jiNDXJnOb776B_mihhEm6uSH2krq-DQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 9:08 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> On 08/15/2011 08:00 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> Here are the options that have been brought up so far, along with my
>> commentary:
>>
>> (1) Honor any style present in a print stylesheet.
>>
>> This doesn't work because the default media of a stylesheet is "all",
>> which means that it's a print stylesheet.  Thus, this wouldn't match
>> current behavior.
>>
>>
>> (2) Honor any style present in a stylesheet that is specifically
>> media='print' (or in an equivalent @media block)
>>
>> This seems hacky, as we don't otherwise attach meaning to the precise
>> way you phrase the media query.  This is similar to how Opera handles
>> full-screen styles (if a media=projection stylesheet is present, use
>> it; otherwise, act like you match 'screen'). Two browser vendors have
>> specifically opposed this.
>
> (1) is ridiculous and unusable, let's replace it with the one you didn't
> mention:
>
> (1) Honor all styles if a print-specific stylesheet is present at the
>    author level.
>
> This means that if I have an @media print {} or an @import "" print; or
> a <link media="print">, we assume that I have thought about printing
> and don't futz with my colors (by default).

Sorry, that's actually what I meant to indicate with #2.  The same
arguments apply (it's hacky, and dbaron and smfr have both said they
don't think it's a good idea).

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 16 August 2011 21:35:23 GMT

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