- From: fantasai via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 04:12:09 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I'm going to kick this back onto the agenda for three reasons: 1. I think this deserves a bit of discussion in the WG about when it's appropriate to disallow otherwise-valid longhand values in a shorthand. There's a few things to balance: - whether the value introduces ambiguity (here it doesn't) - whether the value could in the future introduce ambiguity (maybe; e.g. if we needed to add a text-box-trim: auto value) - whether the value is readable / understandable in the shorthand (this point seems debatable, see commentary above) - these considerations vs the baseline pattern that all values should be valid 2. The issue was about `text-box: auto` being confusing, but the proposal disallows that as well as `text-box: trim-both auto`; do we want to be that aggressive in addressing the original complaint / are there other reasons to disallow `auto` in general? 3. I don't think we should be taking async resolutions on non-trivial topics. Bringing it to a call means its more likely someone will notice a quirk, or some inconsistency/interaction with someone else, and that this comment (even if it's a side-comment) will trigger a discussion that lets us figure out whether it's something that affects the proposed decision. CSS hangs together to the extent it does because we're paying attention to these things, so let's not make a systematic habit of taking them off the radar. -- GitHub Notification of comment by fantasai Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10748#issuecomment-2339570832 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 10 September 2024 04:12:10 UTC