- From: Dylan Schiemann <dylans@yahoo.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 14:11:42 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: Daniel Glazman <glazman@netscape.com>, www-dom@w3.org, www-style@w3.org
--- Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> wrote:
> * Dylan Schiemann wrote on www-dom@w3.org:
> ><body>
> ><div style='width:80%;'>
> ></div>
> ></body>
> >
> >div
> >->getComputedStyle
> >->getPropertyCSSValue('width')
> >->getFloatValue(CSS_PX)
> >
> >will return a value in pixels that is 80% of the
> width
> >of the viewport, right?
>
> Yes, but assume a user agent style sheet with
>
> :root { width: 400px }
>
> >So it does depend on the rendering...
>
> Nope, just on the cascade :-)
Ah, but doesn't the rendering influence the user agent
style sheet value for width?
Somewhat tangentially, is it possible to think of
font-family as a shortcut for the font characteristics
described in [1] ? If font-family names mapped to
specific values for font characterstics then this
point would be moot because getComputedStyle should
only provide values for lower level attributes, not a
shortcut family name. There would be no need for
multiple fonts because we could rely on font matching
and mapping. Then it would be no different than a
named color mapping directly to a hex or rgb value.
[1]
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/fonts.html#font-descriptors
-Dylan Schiemann
http://www.sitepen.com/
http://www.dylanschiemann.com/
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
Received on Monday, 30 April 2001 17:11:53 UTC