- From: Florian Rivoal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 04:33:58 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
After re-reading the minutes, it seems to me that we were partly talking past eachother on the topic of the shorthand. I thought were were discussing whether `text-decoration-skip-ink` should be part of the `text-decoration-skip` shorthand that we previously decided to add to level 4, since that is the question that was explicitly raised by @kojiishi in the first comment in this github issue. It now seems to me that at least @fantasai was discussing whether it should be part of the `text-decoration` shorthand, since her key argument was that it is important that these cascade separately so that you can turn text-decorations on and off separately from deciding what they should look like: > You'll want to set it at a higher level for how you want to behave for the document. Turning on and off for the underline is separate. Thus they shouldn't be conflated. That is an argument for `text-decoration-skip` and all related `text-decoration-skip-*` properties not being part of the `text-decoration` shorthand, and I completely agree with it (and can understand why @fantasai seemed surprised in IRC that I didn't get that point). So if that is what the resolution means, good. This does not however address whether `text-decoration-skip-ink` should or should not be part of the `text-decoration-skip` shorthand, so I think we need a separate resolution on that. As I understand, @kojiishi thinks it should not. See this quote from https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/962#issue-202112937: > It may or may not be part of the shorthand in L4, see #843 for more details. I have read #843, and I fail to see how it provides arguments in favor of `text-decoration-skip-ink` not being part of the `text-decoration-skip` shorthand. It still makes more sense to me `text-decoration-skip-ink` should be part of `text-decoration-skip`, given that the entire purpose of that property is to reset the type of skipping we should have. It seems counter intuitive that it would only reset some kinds of skipping, and I have not seen (or understood) the use cases where you'd like to reset most types of skipping to whatever their default value is but want to preserve ink-skipping being off (keeping it on is not part of the use case, since that's the default and is therefore what you'd get if it were part of the `text-decoration-skip` shorthand). If being unrelated to the `text-decoration` shorthand is not what we resolved on, then I don't understand how @fantasai 's argument is relevant, and I still fail to understand Koji's point. -- GitHub Notification of comment by frivoal Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/962#issuecomment-280228730 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 16 February 2017 04:34:05 UTC