- From: Christoph Päper via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 09:05:15 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I agree that Prince’s keywords in the last table should not be included in the specification. I’m somewhat growing fond of the `fold` or `folio` (function) syntax I mentioned, though, because it’s cleaner than using `calc()`, can help avoid decimal representations of 8th or 16th fractions and it would instantly cover the complete ISO, JIS, ANSI and `arch` series as soon as one size keyword is supported. Personally, I don’t care whether `foolscap`, `crown`, `demy`, `royal` and `imperial` (without hard-coded suffix) are included. -- GitHub Notification of comment by Crissov Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/328#issuecomment-233893870 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2016 09:05:29 UTC