myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Blake Sullivan <blake.sulli...@oracle.com>
Subject Re: [Trinidad] added browser version support in skinning TRINIDAD-799
Date Sat, 19 Apr 2008 21:36:37 GMT
Cristi Toth said the following On 4/19/2008 10:58 AM PT:
> :) yep, I forgot about the "and"
> is "or" valid in those CSS rules?
No.  That's what the comma is for.

-- Blake Sullivan

>
> On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 6:44 PM, Blake Sullivan 
> <blake.sullivan@oracle.com <mailto:blake.sullivan@oracle.com>> wrote:
>
>     Cristi Toth said the following On 4/19/2008 3:51 AM PT:
>>     or @agent ie and (version:6) and (version:8)
>     This rule would never be true because it is asserting that the
>     agent must match IE and the version must match both 6.* and 8.*
>
>     -- Blake Sullivan
>
>
>>
>>     On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 1:31 AM, Blake Sullivan
>>     <blake.sullivan@oracle.com <mailto:blake.sullivan@oracle.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         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> <mailto: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> <mailto: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 <http://www.codebeat.ro>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>                         
>>>>>>>>>                     
>>>>>>>>                   
>>>>>>>                 
>>>>>>               
>>>>>             
>>>>           
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Cristi Toth
>>
>>     -------------
>>     Codebeat
>>     www.codebeat.ro <http://www.codebeat.ro> 
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Cristi Toth
>
> -------------
> Codebeat
> www.codebeat.ro <http://www.codebeat.ro> 


Mime
View raw message