- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 12:21:34 +0200
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style@w3.org
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 22:59:14 +0200, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > In the definitions of 'width' and 'height', the spec says: > > # For continuous media, this is the width of the viewport > # (as described by CSS2, section 9.1.1 [CSS21]). For paged > # media, this is the width of the page box (as described > # by CSS2, section 13.2 [CSS21]). > > Opera's 'projection' mode is in some sense both paged and > continuous. In this case you would want to use the viewport > size, not the page box size (which depends on the content). > In print media also the page box size can change: all even > pages can be one size, all odd pages another, for instance. > So Media Queries should not be referring to the page box. > I'd suggest the terms "paper size" or "page size". (The > interaction of media queries and the 'size' property is a > horrible mess, but I'm hoping we can deal with that in the > Paged Media spec.) > > The definitions say that 'height' "describes the height of > the rendering surface of the output device". This would be > a more appropriate description for 'device-height', which > is currently described as "the height of the output device". > The viewport of a browser window can be smaller or larger > than the height of the screen (which is "the rendering > surface of the output device"). And the 'device-height' > query isn't intended to refer to the height of the physical > monitor box, but rather to the height of the screen. FWIW, as far as I can tell these are the only issues that are holding us back from moving http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-mediaqueries/ to Last Call again (for the last time hopefully!). I can look into making some changes, but I'd appreciate input if you have any concrete ideas. Thanks, -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2008 10:22:12 UTC