W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > July 2021

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-scrollbars] Add `wide` value to `scrollbar-width` (#6351)

From: Wesley Branton via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 02:27:24 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-889581921-1627612043-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
I still disagree with the logic behind the decision, but I guess there's not really much else I can do to convince you.

I think that the "we don't usually add features without a known use-case" logic is directly contradicted by the content in the draft. Take, for example, the `scrollbar-color` property which is also included in the specification. There is no valid functional use-case for that property, other than cosmetic benefits. Yet, the cosmetic benefits of a `wide` scrollbar width option is not sufficient enough in this case?

The specification's abstract reads:

> This CSS module defines properties to influence the visual styling of scrollbars, introducing controls for their color, width, and impact on layout.

Adding a `wide` option falls completely within the abstract of the specification.

Focusing in on the "impact on layout" part specifically, there's no way to assure a standard scrollbar width across all platforms, other than the `thin` option. The `auto` option is insufficient because the width varies greatly between platforms. If a designer is making a website in which the scrollbar width must have a consistent impact on the layout of the page, there designer needs to use the `thin` scrollbar, which may not be desirable. The inconsistency of the width of the scrollbar when using the `auto` option can have a negative impact on the layout of a page, by causing page content to wrap or resize in a way that's different on each platform.

Additionally, the application of the specification may extend beyond websites. For example, web extensions for browsers also use these standards. Some of these web extensions may require more specific control over the scrollbar's visual appearance. Other web extensions may allow users to make visual adjustments to their scrollbars (take for example Scrollbar Customizer for Google Chrome), which is a far more accessible option for the average user compared to UA modifications.

And then of course there are the accessibility concerns I've already expressed previously, which have been ignored by saying that it should be set with a UA modification, which (as far as I know) is not covered under any standard and therefore may be inconsistently supported across browsers.

GitHub Notification of comment by WesleyBranton
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6351#issuecomment-889581921 using your GitHub account

Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 30 July 2021 02:27:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:42:40 UTC