W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2012

Re: Mandate longhand naming conventions and [css3-text] text-emphasis-position

From: Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
Date: Sat, 05 May 2012 05:02:13 +0800
Message-ID: <4FA443D5.7000604@csail.mit.edu>
To: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
CC: Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com>, Florian Rivoal <florianr@opera.com>, WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
(12/05/05 3:51), Koji Ishii wrote:
> text-underline-position[1] too.
> 
>> Example 21
>> Because ‘text-underline-position’ inherits,
>> and is not reset by the ‘text-decoration’ shorthand,
> 
> For these two properties, I think the current design works better than either making it part of shorthand or changing the property names.
> 
> While your general idea seems to make sense, I think authors would surprise if
>   :root { text-emphasis-position: below right; }
>   span.r { text-emphasis: red; }
> changes position, wouldn't they?

That's true indeed. But setting text-emphasis-position on the root is
only useful if you have multiple semantically different content that you
want to style with emphasis dots. Otherwise,

  em { text-emphasis: red below right; }

seems more like what authors would do.


By the way, 'font' isn't a shorthand of all 'font-*' properties in CSS3
Fonts too. Is that a problem? I don't think it's a good idea to remove
the 'font' prefix for these font-related properties...


Cheers,
Kenny
Received on Friday, 4 May 2012 21:02:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:53 GMT