- From: Jen Simmons via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 17:17:28 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I believe we should have interop, and that having this behave differently in different browsers will be a serious problem for Authors. I also believe that — if we do clamp — the line should not disappear. It should just stop moving / appear at the clamped value. Having it disappear leaves a box of mystery for Authors to debug. And a serious interop bug trap waiting to eat people's underlines in untested browsers. I lean towards no clamp at all. Let Authors do what they want. If people can change the color of a strike-through, and change it's thickness, they can style them however they want, separately. If we want to do a wide clap (option 2 above), so that an underline can't end up on the wrong page (in paginated cases), or mess with paint performance, I could agree with that. But I would want it to be fairly wide, this clamp. I definitely don't want to get too fussy, though, and make this super hard to implement. I agree with @dbaron on the call, we should look at doing `text-strikethrough-offest` and `text-overline-offest` asap, so that Authors can also adjust the placement of the line. That will remove the temptation to use underlines for these other use cases. Let all three have equal superpowers in styling, and tell people they should use the correct one semantically. -- GitHub Notification of comment by jensimmons Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4059#issuecomment-510151066 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2019 17:17:30 UTC