- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:56:13 -0700
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Oct 12, 2011, at 3:00 PM, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote: > A recent discussion that probably should have been on the public > list: > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2011OctDec/0041.html > included discussion of the 'vh', 'vw', and 'vm' (perhaps soon to be > rename to 'vmin' or removed) units. It included examples in which > working group members did not notice that their examples were off by > a factor of 100 (using 0.5vh when 50vh was intended). > > So I'd like to raise the general point: css3-values defines a 'vh' > as 1/100 of the viewport height, and a 'vw' as 1/100 of the viewport > width, and 'vm' as the smaller of 'vh' or 'vw'. I think this factor > of 1/100 is confusing given the names of the units, and the fact > that a bunch of WG members failed to notice this error might be a > sign that the spec is taking the wrong approach, and we should > eliminate the 1/100 bit and make a 'vh' be the height of the > viewport (and likewise for 'vw' and 'vm'/'vmin'). > > -David That's a great idea, but didn't someone say that these are already implemented somewhere, unprefixed? If it wasn't unprefixed, then +1 from me too.
Received on Thursday, 13 October 2011 00:56:50 UTC