W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2013

Re: [css3-page] printing, is it a business of CSS at all?

From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 23:32:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CALRQH7-RU5LS9qO=11uqs6D=5YSHH1+zhC9dwQemU2Xf7U5QRg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 11:11 PM, Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/3/25 Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>:
>> If you need to print some document (the "printable") then in principle you
>> just need two documents: so called page template document and
>> the printable itself.
>>
> [stuff deleted]
>>
>> So is my question in the subject line. Why do we need
>> all that in CSS?
>
> How, then, do you propose to specify how the page looks like? Do we
> resurrect DSSSL, if this is not CSS’s business?

You can still use @media print { ... } styles for document *content*
styling.

But for printed page decorations like page number, url
fields then it is really not business of CSS.

If to follow logic of css3-page then we should also
have special style sections for defining UA's chrome when
page is presented in window so @media screen.

That could be cool to have for some extreme CSSiers but
I have some doubts that anyone from UAs vendors will sign under
this.

>
> I know pt (and by extension in, cm, and all that good stuff) is no
> longer useful for printing, but I never agreed to that. Why is
> everyone so anti physical?

There is no technical problems to use in,cm and others in printed
documents. At least in my engines 1cm in CSS is 1cm on printed paper.


-- 
Andrew Fedoniouk.

http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Monday, 25 March 2013 06:33:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:21:07 GMT