- From: jfkthame via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 12:27:17 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Agree with the comments that `-weight` is not appropriate because the values bear no relation to `font-weight`; I think that would be confusing. I'm on the fence regarding `-thickness` vs `-width`; could live with either, I think. It does seem a little odd for something that ends up as a two-dimensional shape on the page to use `width` for the dimension that is normally its height. It makes sense (IMO) if we think of the decoration as a line described by its `length` and `width` (which would be independent of the line's orientation), rather than as a rectangle (normally a very slim one!) that CSS would describe by `width` and `height`. But we don't expose its `length` because that is automatic, at which point the `width` sounds like it should be associated with a `height` like other CSS widths. The `-thickness` name avoids the (false) implication that this is a horizontal measurement, but does perhaps seem less natural as a way to describe a line. Another possible name could be `text-decoration-breadth`, but I doubt anyone will like that; it sounds clumsy to me, even though it's a couple of characters shorter. -- GitHub Notification of comment by jfkthame Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4138#issuecomment-515023341 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 25 July 2019 12:27:18 UTC