myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeanne Waldman <jeanne.wald...@oracle.com>
Subject Re: [Trinidad] added browser version support in skinning TRINIDAD-799
Date Sat, 19 Apr 2008 02:29:15 GMT
+1. I really like the *.

Glauco P. Gomes wrote, On 4/18/2008 4:40 PM PT:
> +1
>
> Glauco P. Gomes
>
> Blake Sullivan escreveu:
>> Glauco P. Gomes said the following On 4/18/2008 4:28 PM PT:
>>> I think that I'm not expressed correctly, what I wanted to say was 
>>> not sequencial major versions.
>>> Eg.:
>>> @agent ie and (version: 6 and 8) {
>>>    /* styles for all 6.*, and 8.* versions of the IE agent versions */
>>> }
>> @agent ie and (version:6), ie and (version:8)
>>
>> -- Blake Sullivan
>>
>>>
>>> Or this doesn't make sense?
>>>
>>> Glauco P. Gomes
>>>
>>> Matt Cooper escreveu:
>>>> 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
>>>> <glaucopgomes@yahoo.com.br> 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
>>>>>>>>>>               
>>>>> <cristi.toth@gmail.com> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>                 
>>>>>>>>>             
>>>>>>>>           
>>>>>>>         
>>>>>>       
>>>>>     
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message