Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-ui] Should interoperability be a goal for the `accent-color` spec? (#5480)

Current (still changeable, of course) state of positions:
* @mfreed7 [supports option A](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5480#issuecomment-682233577)
* @tabatkins [supports option A](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5480#issuecomment-702983695)
* @samuelbradshaw [supports option B](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5480#issuecomment-701515087).
* @x-Jake-x [supports option B](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5480#issuecomment-702419592).
* @bradkemper [supports option B](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5480#issuecomment-703060171).

Others who have participated in these calls, what do you think? **A** or **B**? @frivoal @uma @fantasai @AmeliaBR @jensimmons @emilio @litherum @gregwhitworth 

Again, **A** means **any** proposal that tries to be as specific as possible about **how** the colors get used (e.g. try to put the same color in roughly the same place across browsers), and **B** means **any** more general proposal that doesn't try to lock down **how/where** the colors are used. The canonical example is the checkbox: proposal **A** says that if the background of the checkbox is controllable by `accent-color`, it should be controllable in the same way (e.g. with the **same** value for `accent-color`) across browsers. Proposal **B** says that an `accent-color` value might be used for the background of the checkbox in one browser, and instead for the check-mark in another browser. The **details** of how the actual **A** or **B** spec is written **do not matter for this question**. **Those will be still be very much open for debate, later**.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by mfreed7
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5480#issuecomment-703802356 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Monday, 5 October 2020 18:16:18 UTC