- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 23:22:38 -0700
- To: "Anne van Kesteren (fora)" <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Cc: "W3C Style List" <www-style@w3.org>
Did you say <length>? :) To find the difference what is allowed in 'font-size' and what is allowed in e.g. 'margin', what is <length> and how it is different from <percent> and auto please read this carefuly: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/fonts.html#font-size-props http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/box.html#value-def-margin-width (Am I talking with Turing machine?) Andrew Fedoniouk. http://terrainformatica.com > >> And that is exactly why your proposal doesn't make sense ;-) > > > > Set of allowed values for 'font-size' attribute and e.g. for 'width' > > attribute are already not equal. > > > > Following your logic 'auto' value should be considered as wrong > > because it cannot be applied to font-size. > > No you are wrong. '<length>' is allowed both on 'font-size' and 'width' > and there are no restrictions on things that are defined within > '<length>' like it should. > > > > Anne, sorry, but I cannot understand your logic here. > > Then reread everything inside the specification if you haven't done already. > > > > Just consider 'auto' not as only value but as a units name. These > > 'auto' units has not only 'auto' (100%%) value but also 80auto > > (80%%), etc. > > 'auto' is a value, not a unit. A unit is part of a value. > > > > Just imagine that instead of > > > > <length> Specifies a fixed width. .... auto See the section > > ..... > > > > you will see > > > > <length> Specifies a fixed width. .... <auto> See the section > > describing auto units..... > > > > Is this not clear? > > This is clear, but it doesn't make sense, since '%%' would be part of > '<length>'. > > > -- > Anne van Kesteren > <http://annevankesteren.nl/> >
Received on Friday, 21 May 2004 02:22:44 UTC