summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/vendor/ezyang/htmlpurifier/docs/ref-css-length.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'vendor/ezyang/htmlpurifier/docs/ref-css-length.txt')
-rw-r--r--vendor/ezyang/htmlpurifier/docs/ref-css-length.txt30
1 files changed, 30 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/vendor/ezyang/htmlpurifier/docs/ref-css-length.txt b/vendor/ezyang/htmlpurifier/docs/ref-css-length.txt
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..aa40559e3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/vendor/ezyang/htmlpurifier/docs/ref-css-length.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+
+CSS Length Reference
+ To bound, or not to bound, that is the question
+
+It's quite a reasonable request, really, and it's already been implemented
+for HTML. That is, length bounding. It makes little sense to let users
+define text blocks that have a font-size of 63,360 inches (that's a mile,
+by the way) or a width of forty-fold the parent container.
+
+But it's a little more complicated then that. There are multiple units
+one can use, and we have to a little unit conversion to get things working.
+Here's what we have:
+
+Absolute:
+ 1 in ~= 2.54 cm
+ 1 cm = 10 mm
+ 1 pt = 1/72 in
+ 1 pc = 12 pt
+
+Relative:
+ 1 em ~= 10.0667 px
+ 1 ex ~= 0.5 em, though Mozilla Firefox says 1 ex = 6px
+ 1 px ~= 1 pt
+
+Watch out: font-sizes can also be nested to get successively larger
+(although I do not relish having to keep track of context font-sizes,
+this may be necessary, especially for some of the more advanced features
+for preventing things like white on white).
+
+ vim: et sw=4 sts=4