- From: Florian Rivoal via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2025 09:53:35 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I can think of 5 alternatives: 1. drop `none` from `block-ellipsis`, authors can get the same effect with `""`. Downside: empty-string block ellipsis is simpler to implement than arbitrary string block ellipsis, so it's unfortunate to need the complex system to be able to do the simple thing, and there's a good chance Chrome or other browsers would initially only ship `block-ellipsis: auto` initially, with no possibility to turn things off. 2. rename `none` from `block-ellipsis` to something else. Downside: that's a pretty good name for what it does, not sure what else would work. `empty`? `no-ellipsis`? `blank`? 3. rename `none` from `max-lines` to something else. Downside: that's a pretty good name for what it does, not sure what else would work. 4. change the shorthand fro `none | [<integer [1,∞]> || <'block-ellipsis'>] -webkit-legacy?` to `none | [<integer [1,∞]> || <'block-ellipsis'> || <'continue'>] `, with `continue` being set to `collapse` when omitted, unless we're in the single `none` senario, in which case it is set to `auto`. Downside: now we have an ambiguity between `auto` in the shorthand meaning `continue: auto` or `block-ellipsis: auto` if the other is omitted. 5. No change. Downside: `continue: collapse; max-lines: none; block-ellipsis: none` cannot be expressed with the shorthand. Another shared downside of (4) and (5) is that `none` and `none none` don't mean the same thing (first one maps `continue` to `auto`, second one to `collapse`). I think I favor option 1 (as mentioned previously) because it the long run, it seems like the least intrusive. But 2 or 3 would be nice if we could just find a good name. -- GitHub Notification of comment by frivoal Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12416#issuecomment-3077822438 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2025 09:53:36 UTC