W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2016

Re: [css-values] Comments on Serialization of calc

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2016 20:55:43 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBsmqASgAj4yEWpn1vvU8uHX_51A8eB_GqoQXTgPX==Lg@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: Rossen Atanassov <Rossen.Atanassov@microsoft.com>, Greg Whitworth <gwhit@microsoft.com>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Francois Remy <frremy@microsoft.com>, CSS WG <www-style@w3.org>
On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 9:22 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> On 04/01/2016 03:47 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> While this may have some theoretical value, there are no authors in
>> the wild today depending on this, as IE is the only browser that
>> preserves things exactly.  All other browsers simplify at least
>> somewhat, so authors already have to deal with the fact that their
>> input and output might not be identical (or else they're writing
>> really broken code).
>
>
> This is a very misleading statement. Mozilla only simplifies numerical
> factors, so in fact IE and Mozilla's behaviors are very close and
> preserve almost everything.
>   http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?saved=4029

"Everything" and "almost everything" are *very* different when you're
talking about preserving intent. There's a big difference between "a
third of this 40px margin" and "13.33333333px".

> Also, Rossen's concern (which I share) is not just about what authors
> are depending on right now (given lack of interop between Blink/Webkit
> and IE/FF, it's probably not much), but what would be useful for them
> to have going into the future.

Which I addressed in my further points.

> I won't object to collapsing identical units in specified styles,
> but I'm not convinced that saves us a whole lot, especially given
> we plan to add multiplication and division by units and keywords
> into the calc expressions at some point in the future -- which are
> not things that can be simplified away so easily.

I already addressed this in my earlier message.

~TJ
Received on Sunday, 3 April 2016 03:56:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:38 UTC