- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 09:38:50 -0800
- To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Cc: Hugh Guiney <hugh.guiney@gmail.com>, Matthew Wilcox <elvendil@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 7:13 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 10, 2012, at 1:25 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I'm not sure I agree this is the best thing. I think it would be better for >>> fallback if we can author both width and height and have the height >>> overridden by the aspect ratio. >> >> Hmm, that's an interesting point. It may indeed be useful to do so. >> I'll mark it in my blog post. > > Thanks. And by "height", I'm pretty sure I mean "block progression dimension". Yes, I translated it to "extent dimension". On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 7:24 PM, Hugh Guiney <hugh.guiney@gmail.com> wrote: > Any chance of the video format note being added as well? Or do you feel > there's still more to discuss regarding that? Sorry, forgot about that. Added now. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 11 January 2012 17:39:53 UTC