Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-values-4] Add vhc value (#4329)

It would be good to have some feedback on my input to this thread, so I/we know what to do from here. @frehner [said back in October 2019](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4329#issuecomment-540704298) that *"if someone comes up with a solution that makes the vh unit itself useful again I would be all for it!"*. I've made a suggestion to allow but clarify when/how the viewport/ICB can be overlaid/obscured/cut-off by the user agent. Let's call it the *obscured viewport clarification* suggestion for brevity. With my suggestion, browsers are guided to avoid designs that obscure/truncate/overlay what would ordinarily (e.g. without zoom) be the visible viewport unless it is temporary and for a specific purpose. This hopefully makes `vh` useful again for developers who wish to use it to position content, while accepting that it may be obscured on occasion by the user agent, but only temporarily/briefly. This therefore requires improvement to current mobile browser design, which, [as per my previous post](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4329#issuecomment-731897172), sometimes leaves content cut off most of the time and without good reason. So:

- Firstly, is my *obscured viewport clarification* suggestion a good one, is it a non-starter, or are their misconceptions/other factors for consideration that need to be ironed out? Are there other issues with `vh` that it does not address?
- Secondly, if it is a good suggestion, then where do we go from here and what does that mean for @frehner's proposal to add a new viewport-percentage unit relating to the 'maximum chrome' scenario and his current draft text that also updates the definition of `vh`, especially noting that this proposal has already been approved? Various possibilities I can think of are:
  * This proposal stays as is. I turn my suggestion into a new *obscured viewport clarification* proposal and file a new issue for it. It is understood that implications for the definition of `vh` are incompatible across the two proposals.
  * This proposal is altered to become purely about it new unit, which is considered on its own merits and in way that does not alter the current definition of `vh`. I make a new 'obscured viewport clarification' proposal.
  * This proposal is dropped/abandoned??? I make a new 'obscured viewport clarification' proposal.
  * I work with @frehner to adjust/repurpose this proposal in some way agreed by people here?
  * Something else..?

I'd also like to add that @frehner's [recent thread on twitter](https://twitter.com/aahfrena/status/1330253387636625410) was brought to my attention and I note that I also made several posts on here on the same day. I also note that my colleagues reviewed my first post on this thread before I posted it, and they provided feedback along the lines of "it's fair but very direct/blunt in places" and I acknowledge that I can be overly direct and blunt! So, for the record, while I don't believe I've been in any way aggressive, if I've been overly blunt/direct or just wrong about anything and caused any offence, I apologise. Also, feel free to correct me if you think I've got anything wrong. Thanks.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by mind-bending-forks
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4329#issuecomment-732938676 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Tuesday, 24 November 2020 12:18:17 UTC