Re: [PATCH] docs: custom.css: don't limit randering to old 800px monitors

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

On Fri, 10 Jul 2026 09:27:23 -0600
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > Right now, base.css style imposes a maximum limit of 800 horizontal
> > pixels to be compatible with very old SVGA monitors.
> >
> > Remove such artificial limit, letting the output to be adjusted to
> > the browser windows size.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/sphinx-static/custom.css | 2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/sphinx-static/custom.css b/Documentation/sphinx-static/custom.css
> > index 5aa0a1ed9864..1055db7dc1dd 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/sphinx-static/custom.css
> > +++ b/Documentation/sphinx-static/custom.css
> > @@ -3,6 +3,8 @@
> >   * CSS tweaks for the Alabaster theme
> >   */
> >  
> > +div.body {  max-width: none; }
> > +  
> 
> 800px is clearly a dumb limit, I have no problem changing that.  Going
> to arbitrary width doesn't seem good for readability, though.  What do
> you think about, instead, setting a limit in a resolution-independent
> say, to (say) 60em?

60em also seems too small, considering the size of tables we have on
media. Some tables have one column for each bit, plus one or two other
columns, so the table would easily have up to 34 columns. After adding
long fourcc codes there and V4L macro names, it can easily be very big,
in terms of "em" measures.

If you don't want to let it become too big(*), then perhaps it could
be something like:

	div.body {  max-width: 80%; }

(*) personally, I don't see any issues on it. My monitor's ratio is
    32/9. Quite the opposite, with such ultra-wide screen, I don't like
    sites that have fixed max-width limits, as they end limiting my
    personal taste for no good reason.

Thanks,
Mauro