Re: Percentage height meaurements./ box-sizing

Lachlan Hunt wrote:
> Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
>>I guess that %% units to be implemented will solve your problem.
>    As I already showed in 2 previous posts, there *is* a way to achieve
> the exact result Richard is after!  You're %% units, which you have been
> writing about at every opportunity you could find over the last month,
> are not (as you may believe) the solution to every single box model
> problem an author has.

I agree that most people subscribing this list are already aware of 
%%-proposal and %% isn't going to fix everything that's broken and 
it isn't going to bring world peace. However, it isn't pure evil.

>    Finally, as has already been pointed out to you (read the archives)
> by several respondents to your proposal, there are far too many issues
> for it to be interoperably implentated, and thus considered for the
> specification.  I *will not* discuss it further, and I would hope you do

I don't agree with this claim. I believe that the %% proposal would 
be accepted *if* it had a clear specification. Andrew has some kind 
of implementation and most of the people that have responded to his 
proposal have said that the current specification for the feature is 
far from solid. Once Andrew publishes the reference implementation 
code for this feature I see no problem supporting it (assuming, of 
course, that there're no major glitches with the rest of CSS in the 
implementation). IMO, the most strict spec one can give is a full 
(reference) implementation; that is, everything that produces 
exactly the same result is compliant, anything else isn't. If such 
spec makes any sense, is totally different guestion...


Received on Friday, 28 May 2004 10:39:45 UTC