- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2024 17:01:11 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-text-decor] text-underline-position auto in vertical text`, and agreed to the following:
* `RESOLVED: add auto value for text-emphasis-position, and change the meaning of text-underline-position: auto to care about left vs right in vertical text`
<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
<chrishtr> fantasai: the initial value of text-underline-position is auto, which is defined as "find a good place to put the underline". Three options there: (1) under alphabetical baseline, (2) fully below text (good for lots-of-descenders cases), (3) for vertical text on the RHS<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: auto value is defined in the spec about 'how far down below the text', but doesn't say things about flippinng<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: the current spec says "at or below"<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: in order to handle language-specific aspects, there is a default UA style sheet that for Chinese and Japanese and Korean there are differences for those languages<br>
<fantasai> https://drafts.csswg.org/css-text-decor-3/#default-stylesheet<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: a couple of implementations do this<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: should we change the spec to mention these things?<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: or should we stick with the UA stylesheet approach?<br>
<fantasai> https://www.w3.org/TR/css-text-decor-4/#text-emphasis-position-property<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: propose that we keep the spec as-is<br>
<fantasai> https://www.w3.org/TR/css-text-decor-4/#text-underline-position-property<br>
<Rossen3> q?<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: this would require some implementations to change though<br>
<chrishtr> chrishtr: which implementations would need to change?<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: chrome and firefox are language-sensitive for auto, and webkit uses the default UA style sheet<br>
<chrishtr> rossen: does this mean that webkit needs to change?<br>
<chrishtr> florian: other way around, it would mean chrome and firefox need to change?<br>
<chrishtr> florian: since the two approaches both exist it seems going either way would be web compatible<br>
<emilio> q+<br>
<chrishtr> rossen: sounds like a low-ROI change<br>
<chrishtr> rossen: is it a problem in practice?<br>
<Rossen3> ack emilio<br>
<chrishtr> emilio: I think we should try to go for the firefox/chrome approach<br>
<chrishtr> emilio: avoids weird styles change in ways that developers might not expect<br>
<chrishtr> emilio: we had the same problem with quotes if I'm remembering correctly<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: that was the first time we had a language-aware value<br>
<chrishtr> emilio: reusing that mechanism for this makes sense, but don't have a strong opinion<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: if there is a strong need for these things they we could introduce auto keywords for other things, otherwise UA stylesheet for this case?<br>
<chrishtr> jfkthame: text decoration skip ink does something also, seems to me auto is the cleanest approach<br>
<fantasai> s/other things/text-emphasis-position/<br>
<florian> s/and firefox need to change?/and firefox need to change if we keep the spec unchanged?<br>
<chrishtr> ntim: aligning with text-emphasis-position makes sense to me, and it doesn't have an auto value. i.e. that feature uses UA style sheet rules<br>
<chrishtr> chrishtr: is that true for all browsers?<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: yes, because there is no auto keyword<br>
<dholbert> s/does something/does something language-specific/ (in jfkthame's minutes above)<br>
<chrishtr> jfkthame: it would make sense to me to add auto to that property also<br>
<chrishtr> florian: that would be a change in all browsers<br>
<chrishtr> jfkthame: yes but that could be an improvement<br>
<chrishtr> ntim: is it a common use case to use the auto value to override a non-default value?<br>
<chrishtr> ntim: if not, then the UA style sheet does the job just fine<br>
<chrishtr> florian: we can achieve the effect we want with the UA style sheet, or with auto. both approaches yield the desired result from an author point of view<br>
<chrishtr> florian: from an author point of view, both work. Agree that it's odd for two very similar properties to have different approaches, agree it would be best to be consistent.<br>
<fantasai> A) Keep spec as-is, update Gecko + Blink to match (using UA stylesheet for language switch)<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: option a: keep spec as-is, update gecko & chromium to match. option b: change spec, change webkit to match.<br>
<fantasai> B) Introduce to text-emphasis-position and use it in both text-emphasis-position and text-underline-position to effect language switches<br>
<ntim> Option b requires changing text-emphasis-position in all browsers too<br>
<fantasai> s/Introduce/Introduce auto/<br>
<fantasai> C) Adopt inconsistent behavior: text-underline-position uses 'auto' and text-emphasis-position uses UA stylesheet<br>
<TabAtkins> abstain, no opinion<br>
<emilio> B<br>
<fantasai> POLL: A, B, or C?<br>
<vmpstr> abstain<br>
<chrishtr> B<br>
<jfkthame> B, A, C<br>
<astearns> abstain<br>
<ntim> A, B, C<br>
<fantasai> A, B, C<br>
<ydaniv> abstain<br>
<miriam> abstain<br>
<florian> indifferent between A and B, dislike of C<br>
<dholbert> B, A, C<br>
<schenney> B, A, C<br>
<dbaron> neutral on A vs B, prefer them to C<br>
<oriol> abstain<br>
<rachelandrew> abstain, no strong opinion<br>
<DavidA> abstain<br>
<kizu> abstain<br>
<kbabbitt> abstain<br>
<flackr> abstain<br>
<chrishtr> proposed resolution: add auto value for text-emphasis-position, and change the meaning of text-underline-position: auto to care about left vs right in vertical text<br>
<florian> wfm<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: one side effect of the proposed resolution is that the computed style is less transparent to the developer, vs inspecting the UA style sheet<br>
<emilio> q+<br>
<flackr> q+<br>
<chrishtr> emilio: you have the opposite argument with making initial do the right thing, right?<br>
<chrishtr> emilio: there are arguments in both directions in this dimension<br>
<Rossen3> ack emilio<br>
<chrishtr> emilio: being able to set something reasonable via resets in the style sheet, I mean<br>
<chrishtr> emilio: would expect the initial value to do the right thing - resetting gets rid of UA style sshets<br>
<chrishtr> s/sshets/sheets/<br>
<chrishtr> jftkhame: does seem an auto keyword should do the right thing<br>
<Rossen3> ack flackr<br>
<chrishtr> flackr: what would a UA style sheet rule setting this look like?<br>
<fantasai> https://www.w3.org/TR/css-text-decor-4/#default-stylesheet<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: current default style sheet rules ^^<br>
<florian> :root:lang(zh), [lang|=zh] { text-emphasis-position: under right; }<br>
<florian> [lang|=ja], [lang|=ko] { text-emphasis-position: over right; }<br>
<chrishtr> flackr: writing direction doesn't affect this?<br>
<chrishtr> fantasai: there are two keywords to set the position<br>
<chrishtr> flackr: Thanks. I'm still in favor of option B<br>
<ntim> I'm not objecting, but I can't give a guarantee we can implement option A anytime soon<br>
<chrishtr> RESOLVED: add auto value for text-emphasis-position, and change the meaning of text-underline-position: auto to care about left vs right in vertical text<br>
</details>
--
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1198#issuecomment-2358986319 using your GitHub account
--
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 18 September 2024 17:01:12 UTC