- From: Koji Ishii via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 09:35:46 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Thanks for the update, that part looks good, except one possible nit I put as an inline comment. Please check. > If you agree, great. If you don't (and there's no other issue left), can we get this merged, and open a separate issue to discuss this point? I feel sorry for taking long on this small PR but I prefer to split it out to another PR, discuss and resolve before the merge. I suspect our code reviewers will ask for a spec change if someone tries to contribute to Blink, so I'd like not to take that long path. * We need to check whether white spaces collapses or not on every page, so adding this condition will add slight cost for the additional _if_ statement on every page on every user. It is a very hot code path we try hard to optimize, and I don't think this property is worth the cost for everyone. * This property is only effective when `white-space` allows wrapping. `break-space` being only effective when `white-space` does not collapse looks more consistent to me. There are other such example, such as `text-orientation`, which is only effective in vertical flow. That way, we pay the cost to check the property only in vertical flow. * I understand how you feel it more intuitive, but from another perspective, it's unintuitive to break consecutive white spaces when there are no such white spaces. I feel more intuitive for authors to create consecutive white spaces first before s/he allows them to break. This PR looks good to me if this part was separated. -- GitHub Notification of comment by kojiishi Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/111#issuecomment-246628088 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 13 September 2016 09:35:53 UTC