- From: GS <junkmail.gs@c2i.net>
- Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 15:04:06 +0100
- To: <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <000f01c2d820$0be7f820$7b59d8c1@edda>
John Lewis wrote on Wedensday 19 Feb 2003 at 05:07: >It would be slightly more useful if an integer could be input >directly. The advantage is you could use nonstandard screen resolution >widths (like 666). Actually, I dont think there normally is a need for designing a website on non-standard resolutions. This system would be abel to scale adequately for those few users that have an nonstandard resolution. >> example: >> H2 { font-size: 36 sw12; } >Also, this means we could avoid compatibility problems by using a new >property: screen-width, or something like that. For example: >h2{font-size:36px;screen-width:1200px} This might be an good idea. My intention was that this could be used as a general length unit, to be used everywhere, not only on font-size. Your proposal of a new unt screen-width might be used like this: body{ screen-width:1200px; } Meaning: All px units inside body should be interpreted relative to a screen resolution of 1200px. If the actual screen resolution for instance is 800px, then all px sizes should be recalculated as (800/1200) px; >Would it be more useful for implementers to scale with respect to the >screen width, screen height, My opinion is that a reference to width would be most useful, as it normally is preferred to avoid horisontal scrolling. It would be completely wrong to use both versions, like: body{screen-width:1200px; screen-height:800px} This would be ambigeous if the width/height ratio is different. Gaute Sandvik
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2003 09:10:28 UTC