- From: Jen Simmons via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 17:11:18 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
After the discussion on the call, it seems like there are three options: 1) **No clamp** — allow anything. Leave it to Authors to be responsible. 2) **Wide clamp** — allow all kinds of visual styling that might be wrong semantically (bending the purpose of 'underline'), but do clamp enough so that the underline for one string of text doesn't end up three line boxes away or further (like on another page/screen). 3) **Narrow clamp** — clamp tighter, to prevent Authors from putting the underline across the ascenders, for example, so that it's not possible for an underline to loose its semantic meaning. If we decide on one of these three, then we can debate the details of how to do it (if we choose option 2 or 3). We also debated: 1) Should the specification be precise, with musts, so that there's interop in the details? 2) Allow implementers to figure out some of these details for themselves, and spec with mays or shoulds. Don't worry that it's inconsistent between browsers, and see how things work out. Perhaps spec details later? -- GitHub Notification of comment by jensimmons Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4059#issuecomment-510148922 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2019 17:11:20 UTC