- From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Date: Fri, 07 May 2010 11:54:15 -0700
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, public-fx@w3.org
On May 7, 2010, at 11:21 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org> wrote: >> On Friday, May 7, 2010, 6:22:03 PM, Tab wrote: >> >> TAJ> In the CSS list we're discussing an aspect-ratio property which would >> TAJ> hold a box to a particular width/height ratio. Currently the proposed >> TAJ> syntax is for the property to take a single <number> or two >> TAJ> <integer>s. >> >> TAJ> Someone on the list pointed out that he thought SVG allowed aspect >> TAJ> ratios to be specified with two numbers (that is, something like "8 by >> TAJ> 4.5" rather than "16 by 9"). He couldn't find a reference when I >> TAJ> asked for it, though. >> >> Look at the definition of the viewBox attribute >> http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/master/coords.html#ViewBoxAttribute >> >> "The value of the ‘viewBox’ attribute is a list of four numbers <min-x>, <min-y>, <width> and <height>, separated by whitespace and/or a comma" >> >> where number is defined here >> http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/master/types.html#DataTypeNumber > > Hmm. I'm not sure that that's quite the same. That appears to map to > width and height (this is supported by your later statement), rather > than an aspect ratio itself. Setting a definite width and height > certainly ends up specifying an aspect ratio, but is separate from > *just* specifying an aspect ratio. We have aspect-ratio in media queries: <http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-mediaqueries/#aspect-ratio> It would be nice if there were some consistency. Simon
Received on Friday, 7 May 2010 18:55:08 UTC