- From: Simetrical <simetrical@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 11:11:42 -0400
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 9:15 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > Almost this exact discussion came up on the WHATWG list about <video> aspect > ratios. ^_^ Ian has so far kept the aspect ratio a float. His argument is > that the precision with which we store floats is *vastly* greater than the > differences between aspect ratios in use today or in the relatively near > future, and so the difference between a given ratio and the > closest-approximation float is irrelevant. (And by the time they might get > close, we can just upgrade it to a 64-bit float or something.) The use-cases are different. In HTML5, a float is used to scale a video. If the video is scaled to 1.333 instead of 1.3333..., nobody will notice: that's almost certainly a subpixel difference, or if it isn't, it's so few pixels as to be negligible. In CSS, a float would be used for *equality testing*, and floats just don't work for equality testing. As the standard warning goes, you should never compare floats for equality: you have to do something like x - y <= 0.00001, not x == y. If floats were used here, the standard would have to specify what sort of equality testing would be used.
Received on Friday, 31 October 2008 15:12:18 UTC