It does:
@agent ie and (min-version:5) and (max-version:7) {
/* styles for all 5.*, 6.*, and 7.* versions of the IE agent versions */
}
Regards,
Matt
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Glauco P. Gomes
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1 if this includes multiple major versions (5, 6, 7)
>
>
>
> Glauco P. Gomes
>
> Blake Sullivan escreveu:
>
> > Glauco P. Gomes said the following On 4/18/2008 3:45 PM PT:
> >
> > > I like this option, but what hapens if the user wants to match the
> version 5? (Only 5, not 5.5)
> > >
> > @agent ie and (version:5.0)
> >
> > That will match version 5.0.* but that's probably what he wants
> >
> > -- Blake Sullivan
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Glauco P. Gomes
> > >
> > > Blake Sullivan escreveu:
> > >
> > > > OK, how about
> > > >
> > > > option 5) the version feature is a String that matches the native
> "major.minor.whatever" format of the browser's engine. If the browser's
> engine uses non "." for separating versions, "." is used instead.
> > > >
> > > > For matches, the "*" character is allowed in any version section.
> > > > For comparisons, the "*" is always a valid match regardless of <, >,
> or = comparison
> > > >
> > > > For comparisons where the comparison side contains fewer version
> sections than the actual browser version, the comparison side is padded with
> * version sections and the comparison occurs as above.
> > > >
> > > > For comparisons where the comparison side contains more version
> sections than the actual browser version, the browser version is padded with
> 0 version sections and the comparison occurs as above.
> > > >
> > > > // user wants to match IE 5, actual browser version ie 5.5
> > > > @agent ie and (version:5)
> > > >
> > > > matches because version:5 expands to version 5.* and 5.* matches 5.5
> > > >
> > > > @agent ie and (min-version:5)
> > > >
> > > > matches because version:5 expands to version 5.* and 5.* < 5.5 = true
> > > >
> > > > @agent ie and (max-version:5)
> > > >
> > > > matches because version:5 expands to version 5.* and 5.* > 5.5 = true
> > > >
> > > > // actual browser version gecko 1.9
> > > > @agent gecko and (min-version:1.9.2)
> > > >
> > > > does not match because the browser version 1.9 expands to 1.9.0 and
> 1.9.2 is > than 1.9.0
> > > >
> > > > // actual browser version gecko 1.9
> > > > @agent gecko and (min-version:1.9.*)
> > > >
> > > > matches because the browser version 1.9 expands to 1.9.0 and 1.9.* ==
> 1.9.0
> > > >
> > > > -- Blake Sullivan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Blake Sullivan said the following On 4/17/2008 12:31 PM PT:
> > > >
> > > > > If we agree that we like the we like the media query syntax and that
> the only issue is how to handle less than (as opposed the <=) for the
> max-version, then we can just collect up the proposals and pick one:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) The verbose and explicit (max-version-less-than:8).
> > > > > 2) Define that for the version feature, max-version means < not <=.
> Inconsistent with other uses of max (max-version:8)
> > > > > 3) Let the skinning author provide enough precision to avoid the
> need to distinguish between < 8 and <= a number that apporaches 8
> (max-version:7.99)
> > > > > 4) Add an operator suffix (max-version-lt:8)
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) is gross
> > > > > 2) is potentially confusing due to inconsistency
> > > > > 3) might not be immediately obvious and could theoretically have
> precision problems
> > > > > 4) is not immediately obvious either but incredibly flexible
> > > > >
> > > > > I vote for 3) since it gets the job done and doesn't preclude doing
> more later.
> > > > >
> > > > > -- Blake Sullivan
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Andrew Robinson said the following On 4/17/2008 11:53 AM PT:
> > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/media.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @import url("loudvoice.css") aural;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > so here are multiple groups of characters that show that spaces
> are
> > > > > > acceptable (import url and aural keywords in one "bunch")
> > > > > >
> > > > > > url("loudvoice.css")
> > > > > > shows that parenthesis with at least one argument is acceptable
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @media screen, print {
> > > > > > Shown that a comma separated list, unlike normal CSS selectors
> applies
> > > > > > to the whole @ (meaning that it wasn't "@meda screen, @media
> print")
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From css3 (http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-reader/):
> > > > > > @import "my-print-style.css" print;
> > > > > > here, a quoted string is permissible (goes with the url values in
> CSS rules)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <?xml-stylesheet href="style1.css" type="text/css"
> > > > > > media="screen and (color) and (max-width: 400px"?>
> > > > > > <?xml-stylesheet href="style2.css" type="text/css"
> > > > > > media="reader and (max-device-ratio: 1/1)"?>
> > > > > > Hmmm.... interesting, but do we want to reuse something that
> relates
> > > > > > to CSS but is not in a CSS file?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @media reader and (grid: 0)
> > > > > > Ah, now we are talking. This looks like what Blake was referring
> to
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From http://www.css3.info/preview/media-queries/:
> > > > > > @media all and (min-width: 640px) {
> > > > > > Even better, showing an "all" keyword and having "normal CSS
> > > > > > properties" in parens.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.css3.info/preview/attribute-selectors/:
> > > > > > Do we dare take RegExp like syntax from attr. selectors and apply
> them
> > > > > > to @agent rules?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So I can see Blake's suggestion being backed by these, but IMO
> > > > > > "max-version-less-than:8" is too long to remember.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Perhaps just:
> > > > > > IE 5.5 or greater:
> > > > > > @agent ie and (min-version: 5.5)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IE 5.0 or greater:
> > > > > > @agent ie and (min-version: 5)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IE >= 5.0 and < 6.0:
> > > > > > @agent ie and (version: 5)
> > > > > > or (I like this one less):
> > > > > > @agent ie and (major-version: 5)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IE <= 6.0:
> > > > > > @agent ie and (max-version: 6)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IE < 6:
> > > > > > @agent ie and (max-version: 5.9)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IE >= 6.0 and < 8.0:
> > > > > > @agent ie and (min-version: 6) and (max-version: 7.9)
> > > > > > same as:
> > > > > > @agent ie and (min-version: 6) and (max-version: 7)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IE >= 6.0 and <= 8.0:
> > > > > > @agent ie and (min-version: 6) and (max-version: 8.0)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IE >= 6.0 and <= 8.x:
> > > > > > @agent ie and (min-version: 6) and (max-version: 8)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So x.y (ie 5.5) means precisely that, no vagueness and x (ie 6)
> means
> > > > > > major version x regardless of minor version. If it is too hard to
> > > > > > parse the decimal and remember it, "max-major-version",
> > > > > > "min-major-version" and "major-version" could be used for integer
> only
> > > > > > comparison with the major version and "max-version", "min-version"
> and
> > > > > > "version" could be used for full major.minor comparison.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think using something like 7.9 or 7.99 could theoretically be
> used
> > > > > > for less than but not equal to. I think the fewer number of
> keywords
> > > > > > the clearer it will be to use. Just my opinion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Just adding some thoughts to chew on since concrete ideas were
> asked for.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Andrew
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Cristi Toth
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You're right, I should have discussed the format before
> committing it.
> > > > > > > I started fixing the issue using the format that was specified
> there...
> > > > > > > (there weren't to many comments on that issue btw...)
> > > > > > > During I was fixing it, I noticed that XSS suppported multiple
> versions,
> > > > > > > so I adapted what was suggested on the issue to support that
> too.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Anyway, lets get this subject out in a new thread
> > > > > > > and stick here to discussing the format.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Guys, those of you that suggested some general guidelines, they
> all sound
> > > > > > > good,
> > > > > > > but please try to think of some concrete format that comply with
> those
> > > > > > > guidelines.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If we decide a final format and implement it until its get
> released, then no
> > > > > > > big harm done.
> > > > > > > So please be constructive ;)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for any feedback!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > cheers,
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cristi Toth
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -------------
> > > > > > > Codebeat
> > > > > > > www.codebeat.ro
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
