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

Re: [css-device-adapt][cssom] Missing VIEWPORT_RULE definition

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:17:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBGsvwex3ZsM=E1eX+3AX9XZUxbdipSmNZs__xjLv15qA@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, www-style@w3.org
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 6:08 PM, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com> wrote:
>> Vendors are encouraged to use reasonably unique values outside this
>> range so that they do not clash with extensions from other vendors.
>> For example, the first value for Mozilla could be 0x08EC0001 and
>> 0x09E8A001 could be the first for Opera.
> Where the heck do those numbers come from?!?

As Bjoern pointed out, 0x09E8A000 is a reasonable hex-range 1337
version of "OPERA".  Not sure what relation 0x08EX0000 has to Moz,
though.  (in-flight edit: apparently it's intended to look like

> Wouldn't it make more sense to have a registry of vendor-specific constants on
> the wiki page?

That doesn't seem necessary.  It also implies that vendors (including
the many small browser and non-browser impls) need to coordinate on
their number groups, while choosing an arbitrary 5-hexit prefix gives
you a very reasonable chance of avoiding collisions.  (Assuming you
choose the prefix randomly, we should be able to support several
million impls before collisions become likely.)

Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2011 01:18:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:05 UTC