W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > July 2019

[csswg-drafts] [css-text-decor] Rename `text-decoration-thickness` to `text-decoration-weight`? (#4138)

From: Jen Simmons via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:34:40 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issues.opened-470816563-1563737679-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
jensimmons has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts:

== [css-text-decor] Rename `text-decoration-thickness` to `text-decoration-weight`? ==
I discovered this week that there was still a bit of confusion about the name of the new CSS property for adjusting the width/thickness of an underline. (Mozilla had implemented the [older name & just updated to the new one.](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1567282).) Because I was poking around, trying to figure this out, a new name occurred to me. 

For background: Currently, [see draft spec](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-text-decor-4/#text-decoration-width-property), the name for this new property is `text-decoration-thickness`. It was originally called `text-decoration-width`. The name [was changed last October](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3118#issuecomment-432301016). Best I can tell, along the way, some folks argued "width" better matched some of the other CSS properties, like `border-width`. While some argued `width` is confusing, because it's not going to adjust the length in the inline-direction. (I agree with this, width sounds like adjusting the length of the underline, not the thickness). Some folks also argued that the word "thickness" is not great for an international audience, the 'th' might be especially hard for non-English speakers. I don't think that any other names were debated (from a cursory skim of the issues).

Yesterday, I was chatting with a journalist/editor in NYC about CSS and recent CSSWG debates, and he said in his world of newspaper typesetting, that dimension is called weight. They talk about the _weight_ of an underline. Which struck me as perhaps a really good solution.


This better matches existing CSS — `font-weight` also adjusts the thickness of typographic lines (the one inside the characters themselves). It's not a word that's as hard for an international audience. And it will not be confusing for Authors. 


It's annoying to have to change existing implementations (shipped in Safari, on it's way in Firefox). But perhaps this is worth it?  

@litherum @fantasai ?

Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4138 using your GitHub account
Received on Sunday, 21 July 2019 19:34:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:41:50 UTC