- From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
- Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 09:24:03 +0200
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org list" <www-style@w3.org>
Le 23/10/2012 01:44, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit : > I'm fine with making it clearer in the <resolution> definition that > the lengths mentioned are CSS units, not real lengths. All existing > uses of <resolution> agree with that. Great. This was the main issue in my previous message. (There was confusion in another thread between the resolution MQ and the physical DPI of a mobile device.) > The definition of "dot" is purposely ambiguous, because it has at > least two definitions, depending on usage. For MQ, it's a device > pixel. For Images, its an image pixel. Each use of <resolution> > needs to define what it means by "dot". I'm also fine with adding a > requirement to this effect into the spec. Oh, I see. But when first reading the spec I had no way to know this was on purpose. This is really minor compared to the other issue, but I’d prefer to have a note as you say rather than leave it ambiguous. -- Simon Sapin
Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2012 07:25:03 UTC