- From: Koji Ishii via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2019 06:31:22 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> was the feedback that they "looked poor" referring to them in a Latin-script context, or was it in relation to use of these characters in a CJK context? There are two cases; one is that they are unified code points, and we don't implement smarter IsCJK function for those code points. Dagger and double-dagger are in this category. We hope to improve this in future. The other case is some characters in Latin-script context. IIRC Consolas has rather tall slashes (solidius), and URLs using Consolas looked poor ([jsbin](https://jsbin.com/qihuziw/edit?html,output)), and URLs with underlines were too common to ignore. Maybe there are a few more fonts, and "//" skipping ink for proportional fonts looked even weird. Blink's internal function [CanTextDecorationSkipInk()](https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/third_party/blink/renderer/platform/text/character.cc?type=cs&q=CanTextDecorationSkipInk&sq=package:chromium&g=0&l=176) implements this. We checked WebKit behavior. On Mac/iOS, monospace fonts have shorter glyphs, and WebKit has less gaps than Blink does. Blink rounds in the direction to widen the gap, and rounding is done by CSS pixels, not by device pixels. Checked Gecko too, it looks like Gecko has more gaps that they don't interfere with underlines. We hope to improve this too, so I feel better if we don't define them in the spec. -- GitHub Notification of comment by kojiishi Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4276#issuecomment-541291594 using your GitHub account
Received on Saturday, 12 October 2019 06:31:24 UTC