W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2011

Re: background-print

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 08:40:04 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBPLVBNOySgPpQ_PVKE+mTHyZh+FduzhdUS9VTHcmipqA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
Cc: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style@w3.org
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:41 AM, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com> wrote:
> Also sprach L. David Baron:
>  > > If you do it hackily, so that 'background' is only honored if it
>  > > appears in a stylesheet specifically linked with media="print", you're
>  > > introducing novel and imo really ugly behavior into the platform.
>  > > This is akin to Opera's behavior in fullscreen being based off the
>  > > presence or absence of a stylesheet with media=projection in the page,
>  > > which is really nasty.
>  >
>  > Agreed.  I think this sort of behavior makes some sense for an
>  > implementation that assumes content authors never consider its
>  > behavior when developing their content, but is a bad idea as a
>  > standardized behavior or as a behavior to be used by an
>  > implementation that authors are likely to care about, because of the
>  > confusion (about expected results and about the model underlying
>  > them) that such testing would lead to.
> When the user presses F11 in Opera, @media projection is honored. If
> no such style sheet exists, @media screen is honored. As such, Opera
> either goes into projection mode or screen mode. I don't see why this
> is so bad -- certainly no worse than not supporting @media projection
> at all?

I suppose it's a matter of taste, but altering behavior based on the
presence or absence of a stylesheet with a particular media value is
just hacky.

I understand the problem, but believe it should have been addressed by
fixing MQ instead so that "screen" can match alongside other types.
MQ is just designed badly here - "screen" is *not* mutually exclusive
with "projection" or "tv" (and maybe even "handheld").

But anyway, this is off-topic.  If you'd like to continue along this
vein, could we branch to a new thread?

Received on Thursday, 11 August 2011 15:40:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:03 UTC