- From: David Perrell <davidp@earthlink.net>
- Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 14:05:35 -0800
- To: <www-style@w3.org>
Ian Hickson wrote: >Well, isn't this what the @page {} rule does? (CSS2, page.html#didx-page) >I suppose one could also have an @screen or an @canvas. @page, as described, doesn't work for accessing the canvas. It doesn't explain reverse-inheritance of background, nor does it allow setting the default font for display. And it doesn't explain scrolling of the background. @canvas, though, makes sense to me. The canvas is described, along with the use of the HTML element for setting backgrounds, at <http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-CSS2/media.html#h-8.3.1>, but this description is somewhat confusing in that it unnecessarily introduces new and sometimes conflicting terminology. The first paragraph under 'Scrollable media' is just plain wrong. There should be no instance where the canvas does not fill the viewport. If the canvas doesn't fill the viewport, what background is used for the empty areas? Put more simply, the canvas has fixed height and width corresponding to the UA window or frame (viewport) and an auto scroll property. It is the canvas that scrolls, not the BODY element, and by default it may scroll in both directions. There should be no instance where the canvas does not fill the viewport. If the canvas doesn't fill the viewport, what is the background of empty areas? Whether @canvas or HTML, there needs to be a parent of BODY that fits the above description. That way, BODY can be absolutely or relative positioned and sized such that the markup that produces the effect on <http://www.hpaa.com/css1/div_frame.html> when using IE4 as UA will be condoned by the CSS spec (I believe that relative sizes as applied to BODY are currently undefined.) David Perrell
Received on Friday, 19 December 1997 17:05:46 UTC