- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 09:22:14 -0700
- To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>, www-style@w3.org
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 2, 2010, at 7:53 PM, fantasai wrote: > >> On 05/26/2010 08:06 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote: >>> Referring to http://www.xanthir.com/:wih document. >>> >>> I don't think that 'fl' is particularly good name for flex units. >>> One of the reasons is that character 'l' is very close to either 'I' or >>> '1' in most of fonts in use for development. >>> >>> I think that something like 1fx is better. >> >> The WG at one point also considered 'fr' for this use case. >> I think that may have found its way into some drafts already. >> I'm happy with any of the three. > > What does the "r" stand for? > > I agree with Andrew that "fl" is hard to read. To my rapidly aging eyes it just looks like two fence posts, unless I reach for the reading glasses. > > How about "fu" for "flex units"? It has the added benefit of being kind of funny. "fr" is short for "fraction". I'm sympathetic to the argument that "fl" is hard to read. It's even worse in the common case when you have "1fl" - 3 very tall skinny characters jammed together. "fu" has the extra benefit that "fa" (flex additive) is easy to pronounce (I prefer units that are pronounceable as words). ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 3 June 2010 16:23:09 UTC