Browse thread
[ANN] CCSS 1.0
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Daniel_Bünzli <daniel.buenzli@e...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] [ANN] CCSS 1.0 |
> I understand why you may see this as a bug, but for me it's a feature. > Personal experience tells me that mixing units -- even if they belong > to the same system, as cm and mm -- is asking for trouble (never mind > mixing units from metric and imperial -- ask NASA). Well you're not in a NASA case since all the data is tagged correctly. > But anyway, if you really think unit conversion is a must-have feature, > I can add it to the next release (it's actually simple to implement). > However, personally I remain sceptical about its real-world usefulness. For the web I anyway use more relative lengths than absolute ones. I don't know if it's a must have feature however I can see that being annoying if you have to do an absolute layout (e.g. for print). The problem is that different kind of objects naturally use different kind of units. A font size or line height for example is usually expressed in pts and a standard paper or photographic print size will be in cms (or inches). Having to use a calculator to add them just feels wrong and makes the resulting stylesheet less readable : if I see 210mm x 297mm I recognize quite easily A4, however if I see 595.275591pt x 841.889764pt, well, no. Conversely a value in pt for a line height or font size will give me a better idea of the typographical result than a value in mm. Best, Daniel P.S. I know about metric typographic units [1] but somehow they didn't catch and most people still think in pts in typography. [1] http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/metric-typo/