- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2008 14:13:38 +0200
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, www-style@w3.org
On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 06:18:29 +0200, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
wrote:
> The editor's draft at
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-mediaqueries/#orientation gives the
> examples:
>
> # @media all and (portrait) { ... }
> # @media all and (landscape) { ... }
>
> However, I couldn't find any normative text allowing the value to be
> used without the feature. I would think that '(orientation)' is a
> valid expression (always true), and '(orientation: portrait)' is
> also valid, but I don't see anything allowing '(portrait)'. Should
> these examples include the "orientation: "? Or was this additional
> shorthand form intended to be allowed?
>
> (Allowing it seems like it would reduce future extensibility.
> However, since this is just syntactic sugar for aspect-ratio, I'm
> not sure that's a real concern. However, it is extra work for
> implementations.)
I think this was a simple mistake. I have fixed these now.
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Monday, 7 April 2008 12:14:05 UTC