- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 21:35:51 -0700
- To: julien.cayzac@gmail.com
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
- Message-Id: <162B210A-A9EE-4B8E-B6DC-75B3F5DB9379@gmail.com>
On May 5, 2010, at 5:17 PM, Julien Cayzac wrote: >> 3) We add aspect-ratio, but have it only interact with 'auto' values >> for width/height. So, in the previous example, the aspect-ratio would >> have no effect, since both width and height are already specified. If >> you set height:auto instead, though, then aspect-ratio will be >> consulted to resolve it. Or you could set height and leave width as >> auto, so aspect-ratio would also have an effect. Finally, if both >> were auto (the default), then whichever is resolved first (typically >> width) would be resolved normally, then aspect-ratio would be used to >> resolve the other dimension (typically height). >> I like #3 the best. > > Same here. The way dimensions get resolved is more understandable this way I think that is the best choice, to avoid confusion over which height/width to use. Also, I would go further and say that it only interacts with 'auto' values when there is no conflicting min/max-width/height in that dimension (min/max takes precedence).
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Thursday, 6 May 2010 04:36:27 UTC