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

Re: [css3-values] 1/100 factor on vh/vw/vm units

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:56:13 -0700
Message-Id: <859EB9B1-6EE6-46A3-A367-64F748EBAA24@gmail.com>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>


On Oct 12, 2011, at 3:00 PM, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:

> A recent discussion that probably should have been on the public
> list:
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2011OctDec/0041.html
> included discussion of the 'vh', 'vw', and 'vm' (perhaps soon to be
> rename to 'vmin' or removed) units.  It included examples in which
> working group members did not notice that their examples were off by
> a factor of 100 (using 0.5vh when 50vh was intended).
> 
> So I'd like to raise the general point:  css3-values defines a 'vh'
> as 1/100 of the viewport height, and a 'vw' as 1/100 of the viewport
> width, and 'vm' as the smaller of 'vh' or 'vw'.  I think this factor
> of 1/100 is confusing given the names of the units, and the fact
> that a bunch of WG members failed to notice this error might be a
> sign that the spec is taking the wrong approach, and we should
> eliminate the 1/100 bit and make a 'vh' be the height of the
> viewport (and likewise for 'vw' and 'vm'/'vmin').
> 
> -David

That's a great idea, but didn't someone say that these are already implemented somewhere, unprefixed? If it wasn't unprefixed, then +1 from me too. 
Received on Thursday, 13 October 2011 00:56:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:45 GMT