- From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:10:47 -0700
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 10/15/13 8:38 AM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >Per our design patterns for CSS properties (apparently not written >down anywhere, unfortunately*), we don't use open continuous >intervals, because then whether something is valid or invalid depends >on unpredictable and UA-specific rounding behavior. > >However, 'column-width' states that its value must be a <length> >greater than zero. This violates that constraint. > >I suggest that we instead state that there is a minimum size for >columns (1px? ua-specific?), Given that you want to avoid UA-specific behavior, it would not make any sense to make the minimum size UA-specific. > and that values less than this minimum >are clamped to the minimum. Values less than zero are still invalid, >as they're nonsensical. > >This allows authors to confidently use small values without worrying >about whether some UA is going to drop the declaration entirely and >screw everything up. > >* I've got some pending edits to ><http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/limited-ranges> explaining the "always use >closed intervals" logic, and how to actually do it, but I can't >actually edit the page right now. > >~TJ >
Received on Tuesday, 15 October 2013 16:11:19 UTC