- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2026 17:34:55 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Okay, I understand your concerns, Florian, but seem to disagree on the harm that authors could actually cause themselves. As you say, a hairline width is less likely to be a problem than a dppx width. People *can* do stupid things, but it's not meaningfully different from manually specifying a `.1px` or something, which they can do today (and don't). So my preference is to accept [Emilio's "ideal proposal"](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3720#issuecomment-3762832472), that is: * add `hairline` to `<line-width>` * add `env(hairline)` to give the same width but generically * add `border` as a rounding method to `round()` to solve some of the "just act like a border" use-cases that aren't necessarily hairline-related; that is, `round(border, Xpx)` -- GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3720#issuecomment-3999073709 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 4 March 2026 17:34:56 UTC