W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2014

Re: The "resolution" media query is a misnomer IMHO

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 18:39:52 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDCMz7o=7rWGGyE6coySLh6mkGL2YhDc3b7d+SqN=B1aog@mail.gmail.com>
To: Behrang Saeedzadeh <behrangsa@gmail.com>
Cc: W3C CSS Mailing List <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Behrang Saeedzadeh <behrangsa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> Traditionally "resolution" has referred to the size of a display in pixels.
> For example WQHD is used to refer to a screen that its resolution is
> 2560x1440 (see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_resolution), no
> matter if it is 24", 27", or 31".
> In other words, traditionally, resolution did not take into account pixel
> density of a screen.
> However in CSS media queries, "resolution" is actually referring to the
> pixel density of the device, no matter what its resolution is.
> So, "resolution" in this context, looks like a misnomer and I believe it
> should be deprecated in favor of a better name (e.g. "pixel-density").

Note that the Wikipedia page you cite says that the use of
"resolution" to refer to pixel dimensions is a misnomer, though a
common one, and states that in other contexts it refers to the pixel
density.  "Resolution" can also be stated as a flat number of pixels
in some contexts, such as digital camera resolutions.  It's just an
overloaded term that can refer to a couple of closely-related

When used on images, "resolution" generally refers to the pixel density.

I think the usage of "resolution" to refer to pixel density is
sufficiently common to be understandable, and the other uses of
resolution are either already achievable via other MQs (such as
'width' and 'height'), or aren't really meaningful.

Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2014 02:40:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:18 UTC