Re: aspect-ratio property

You might take a look at the value syntax used by ttp:pixelAspectRatio [1],
which could be generalized to take non-integer arguments.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ttaf1-dfxp/#parameter-attribute-pixelAspectRatio

On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 5:15 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:

> On Friday 2011-12-02 16:02 -0800, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> > dbaron suggested switching this to an explicit ratio with two numbers,
> > but that doesn't solve the issue at all - now *both* numbers have to
> > be greater than zero. For example, for "aspect-ratio: 1 .0000001;
> > width: auto; height: 1px;", the width would get resolved to 1 million
> > pixels.  As the ratio approaches "1 0", the width approaches infinity.
> >  The same happens if the first number approaches zero if height is
> > underspecified instead.
>
> I'd use the 4/3 syntax that media queries uses rather than "4 3".
> See http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-mediaqueries/#values .
>
> > I can resolve this by including zero but making its behavior
> > discontinuous (probably by saying that "0" is the same as "none").
> > Thoughts?
>
> It would only have to be discontinuous one way around.  And people
> might want to use it the other way around (i.e., to make the output
> dimension zero when the other dimension is input).
>
> > 3. How should this be interpolated for Transitions/Animations?  Do we
> > want to make it work like a normal number?  Work in ratio space (if
> > the number is >1, represent it as "x : 1", if it's <1, represent it as
> > "1 : 1/x", then interpolate each side)?  Work in log space?  Work in
> > width/height space instead?  I haven't given this enough thought to
> > know if any of the preceding are identical, or what each looks like.
>
> I'd prefer something that's symmetric for widths and heights (i.e.,
> not interpolating as a single number).
>
> -David
>
> --
> 𝄞   L. David Baron                         http://dbaron.org/   𝄂
> 𝄢   Mozilla                           http://www.mozilla.org/   𝄂
>
>