I'll be happy either way, but I think I now bend to the below
explanation of 5 == 5.0 from Jeanne's reasoning

In the future we could add:

@agent ie and (major-version: 5)

where only the major-version is compared.

-Andrew

On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 6:07 PM, Jeanne Waldman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually, I take that back. I think if I saw max-version: 5, I'd think 5.0.
>  The reason is people talk about versions, like, 2.0.0.10 and 2.0.0.4, etc,
> so if I saw 2.0, I'd think 2.0.0.0
>
>  Otherwise I like #3.
>
>  Jeanne Waldman wrote, On 4/17/2008 2:43 PM PT:
>
>
>
> > I think if I saw max-version: 5, I'd think that all minor versions of 5
> would work, too.
> > Otherwise, I would have written max-version: 5.0.
> > - Jeanne
> >
> >
> > Blake Sullivan wrote, On 4/17/2008 12:58 PM PT:
> >
> > > Andrew Robinson said the following On 4/17/2008 12:35 PM PT:
> > >
> > > > So do I read this correctly that for #3, 8 means 8.x so a max-version
> > > > of 8 means any browser agent with a major version of 8 or less an not
> > > > even look at the minor version?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > I'm proposing that the version feature reflect the best floating point
> version number we can calculate for the browser, which will usually be a
> combination of the major and minor version, so the version for IE 5.5 will
> be the floating point number 5.5
> > >
> > >
> > > 8 is promoted to 8.0 and since max- means
> less-than-or-equal-to:max-version:8 means
> > >
> > > version <= 8.0 == true
> > >
> > > -- Blake Sullivan
> > >
> > >
> > > > If so, I like 3 as well.
> > > >
> > > > -Andrew
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Blake Sullivan
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > 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
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to