- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2025 21:55:59 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I don't think I agree with the core argument of this thread. If a value isn't supported, there is *no* fallback that is guaranteed to be correct. Defaulting to "round" is just as likely to be reasonable as defaulting to "square", without context, and I think in practice it's much *more* likely to be correct. Looking at the examples given in this thread: * I think the weather example would look just fine falling back to "round". * The pokemon example would be just as visually jarring if it fell back to "square" corners, as the placement of the menu items is dependent on the bevel angle and it would create a funky "staircase" effect, so neither fallback is actually very good for it. There wasn't an example of this given in the thread yet, but squircle corners would definitely be best falling back to "round". The concave values are a harder sell, just because there's *no* close example, but if I had to choose between "round" and "square" to render a "scoop" with, I think I'd still choose a "round" as the most reasonable default, simply because it cuts out *something* from the corners and breaks up the strict rectilinear lines, which is usually the core of the effect you're reaching for. If your particular use-case disagrees with this, and you think square would be a better fallback in older browsers, we already have a solution for that - `@supports`. I don't think we should add a secondary way of specifying border radiuses; seeing both a 'border-radius' and 'corner-size' on an element, and having to tell that 'border-radius' is ignored *unless* one of the 'corner-*' properties for that corner is "none", is confusing. We try our best to avoid those sort of override designs unless we have a very good reason. That said, I definitely wouldn't object to a 'corners' shorthand setting both 'border-radius' and 'corner-shape', which would happen to function as a "soft" fallback to square corners in legacy UAs (since they'd ignore the shorthand and not end up setting 'border-radius' either). `corners: squircle 2em` is definitely nicer than `border-radius: 2em; corner-shape: squircle;`. -- GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11623#issuecomment-2932650224 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 2 June 2025 21:56:00 UTC