- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 11:33:51 +0100
- To: "Dean Jackson" <dino@apple.com>, "Bert Bos" <bert@w3.org>
- Cc: Www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 19:31:32 +0100, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote: > We are interested in these features, but request changes. > > aspect-ratio and device-aspect-ratio > ------------ > > We think these should take a number (float) rather than a ratio (defined > as a string). While ratio gives the same result it doesn't seem worth > introducing a new type just for these queries. > > Also, the spec should be clear wether or not it is talking about the > physical dimensions (and, as such, give an example without square > pixels). This syntax has been stable for over six and half year (for device-aspect-ratio). Do we really want to fiddle with that? (There are two implementations too.) If we do anything with these features I'd rather drop them completely at this point as I still haven't heard a convincing use case for them (other than the one orientation addresses). > orientation > ----------- > > We think this should be defined using an angle and allow min/max > prefixes. The spec can say that an implementation should report the > angle to the best of its ability. What's the use case for that? (My apologies for the belated reply, I've been climbing mountains and did some travelling for Opera not related to my main job.) -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Wednesday, 3 December 2008 10:34:41 UTC