W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2014

Re: [css-text-decor-3] determining position and thickness of line decorations

From: Rafal Pietrak <rafal@ztk-rp.eu>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 14:24:41 +0200
Message-ID: <53BFD789.5090808@ztk-rp.eu>
To: www-style@w3.org

W dniu 11.07.2014 11:44, fantasai pisze:
> On 07/10/2014 04:39 AM, Rafal Pietrak wrote:
>> Still, wouldn't it be worthwhile pondering on text-decoration-image
>> (or the earlier Sebastian Zartner proposal) at this point?
> No. Maybe at some future point, but we still have a ways before
> implementations even catch up to the spec as it stands, and adding
> image support is going to be super complicated in comparison.

I'm not so sure of that.
1. the image support "per se" is present in browsers from (i think) 
mozaic days.
2. at minimum the only vital difference "at/for text-decoration" from 
standard "repeat image" is observing line breaks (and line height) - 
clipping to "line box".
3. the decoration-image becomes quite useful when there is an option to 
control positioning (perpendicular to baseline)  of the image.
4. apart from that, explicit z-index is almost all that is imaginably 
usefull for that.

> When we've got solid support for non-image decorations, and there's
> a strong demand for image decorations, we can think about it then.

Hmm. Here I may be entirely wrong, but I've looked at public 
comparetions of browsers support for css3. it looks like the 
text-decoration-style is currently only sported by mozilla. So when 
others start coding, getting additional image support may be just a 
small additional effort with a particular leap to next release.

Of course current css3 text-decoration looks feature-reach and may be 
sufficient for a long time .... or even "forever".

But. All I wanted to say is that maybe it's worth sattling today on 
whether decoration-image is currently perceived as a "next-step", or may 
be as a "no-go" in foreseeable future.

Received on Friday, 11 July 2014 12:25:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:23 UTC