W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2009

[whatwg] size attribute

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:33:05 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0904281830490.12381@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, Kristof Zelechovski wrote:
>
> The algorithm [1] for converting a character width to pixels is good 
> indeed, except that it should be formulated in terms of glyphs and not 
> characters because stand-alone characters are not displayed or perceived 
> as such for some scripts.

As far as I can tell, "character width" is an adequate term here. I don't 
want to sacrifice readability for pedantism when it's not necessary.


> If the primary font for which the algorithm is being run comprises 
> several scripts, as it typically does, characters of the script of the 
> effective language of the control should take overwhelming weight in the 
> average.

As far as I can tell from testing other browsers, this is not the case.


> This algorithm does not fulfill the requirements for the size attribute 
> formulated in section 4.10.4.2.4 [2]: when it is applied, it may happen 
> that the user agent will not be able to allow the user to see the whole 
> text it should be able to allow.  The requirement should be modified to 
> match the effect of the algorithm.

The text in 4.10.4.2.4 doesn't contain a requirement as far as I can tell. 
It's just non-normative text for authors. As such it seems better to be 
simple than precise.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 28 April 2009 11:33:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:11 UTC