- From: Christoph Päper via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 13:38:26 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Unlike teχers, traditional typesetters are probably fine with `72pt` =
`1in`, at least.
calc(3pc + 4.5pt) calc(3pc + 9pt / 2) calc(3pc + 3pc
/ 8) calc(9in / 16)
p(3, 4.5) p(3 4.5) p(3 p 4.5) p(3pc 4.5pt)
3-4.5pc 3+4.5pc 3:4.5pc 3,4.5pc 3/4.5pc
3&4.5pc 3..4.5pc
3pc-4.5 3pc+4.5 3pc:4.5 3pc,4.5 3pc/4.5
3pc&4.5 3pc..4.5
3pc&4.5 40pt&10 0in&3.375 14mm&1.15
57q&37.5
3pc4.5 40pt10 0in3.375 14mm1.15
57q37.5
3.375pc 40.5pt 0.5625in 810twip 14.2875mm
57.15q 14287.5um
3⅜pc 40½pt 9⅟16in 9⁄16in 9÷16in
The real problem is not this particular traditional syntax, but
**vulgar fractions** and (irrational) **constants** (like π or τ in
#309 and ϕ or √2). The former can be done with `calc()` accurately,
but non-coders are used to a more concise, symbolic syntax, which
could be done with Unicode characters for the most part. I don’t think
the `p` syntax alone is worth a grammar change, but vulgar fractions
and constants might.
Sadly, this is an issue where switching to relative or metric length
units doesn’t help much.
--
GitHub Notification of comment by Crissov
Please view or discuss this issue at
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/315#issuecomment-233635096
using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 19 July 2016 13:38:32 UTC