- 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