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*

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

> 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.

Received on Monday, 25 March 2013 06:33:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 February 2015 12:35:24 UTC