Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-text-decor] A new property for text decorations to skip ink

Does that mean you agree not to include to `text-decoration` shorthand
 but you prefer to include in `text-decoration-skip` shorthand? If so,
 I think I incorrectly assumed that it's no longer a discussion point,
 sorry about that. And I agree with your interpretation that 
@fantasai's comment at the weekly call was about `text-decoration` 
shorthand, not about `text-decoration-skip` shorthand.

I think I wrote this somewhere, but my mild preferences in the order 
is:
1. Not to have `text-decoration-skip` shorthand.
2. If we were to have one, not to include `ink`. Maybe some others 
too.

but I'm ok if people prefers other options.

My primary concern is when author starts using
```css
:root { text-decoration-skip: ink; }
```
and when a UA supports `leading-spaces`, the page suddenly draws 
underlines to leading spaces. Stylish values are likely to be applied 
to the whole document, and it is possible to hit us when we want to 
add new values. On the other hand, semantic values are likely to be 
used like:
```css
image.emoji { text-decoration-skip: none; }
```
so they look less risky to me.

IIRC @fantasai and I discussed that `ink` (and maybe `edges` too) is 
about stylish, while values like 'objects' is about semantics (such as
 this image is Emoji while that image is photo) and that the meaning 
of "skip" is somewhat different. So I assume she and I are in 
consensus, and I guess I incorrectly assumed all of us are in 
consensus.

Note, one may still do:
```css
div.message-pane { text-decoration-skip: none }
```
to draw underlines to Emoji in a message app, without knowing it 
disables `ink`, `edges`, and all other values. That's why I feel 
having `text-decoration-skip` shorthand has more risks than benefits, 
but if you or anyone is strong about this, I'm ok.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by kojiishi
Please view or discuss this issue at 
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/962#issuecomment-280309283 
using your GitHub account

Received on Thursday, 16 February 2017 11:45:03 UTC