W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > August 2016

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-round-display][mediaquery] Properly define 'viewport-fit'

From: Jihye Hong via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 06:07:37 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-236808864-1470118056-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
> Example 1: @viewport { width: auto; viewport-fit: cover; }
The width and height of the layout viewport and visual viewport are 
200px, so the initial zoom level is 1.
Example 2: @viewport { width: auto; viewport-fit: contain; }
The width and height of the layout viewport and visual viewport are 
141px, so the initial zoom level is 1.
Example 3: @viewport { min-width: 400px; viewport-fit: cover; }
The width and height of the layout viewport are 400px, and the width 
and height of the visual viewport are 200px, so the initial zoom level
 is 0.5.
Example 4: @viewport { min-width: 400px; viewport-fit: contain; }
The width and height of the layout viewport are 400px, and the width 
and height of the visual viewport are 141px, so the initial zoom level
 is 0.3525.

Those are really nice examples to understand how `width` and 
`viewport-fit` work.
In the example, more precisely, does 'layout viewport' mean 'actual 
layout viewport'?

Also, I think it's better to change the definition of 'viewport-fit' 
from "set the size of the initial viewport" to "set the size of the 
visual viewport" if 'visual viewport' is defined in Device Adaptation 
Spec.
(I suggested the definition of that terminology in #206.)

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by jihyerish
Please view or discuss this issue at 
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/171#issuecomment-236808864 
using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 2 August 2016 06:07:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 19 October 2021 01:30:22 UTC