Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] text-wrap: pretty (Issue #864)

The TAG looked at this again in a breakout today, and we returned to the naming issue. The name `pretty` doesn't convey to authors that this feature is computationally expensive, which may lead to more widespread adoption than is desirable, which will harm the real-world performance of sites. (That is, `text-wrap: pretty` is an [attractive nuisance](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attractive_nuisance_doctrine).) This concern isn't theoretical: consider [this social media post](https://x.com/ChallengesCss/status/1800120864194863565) encouraging authors to unconditionally apply `text-wrap: pretty` to everything:

> 💡 CSS Tip!
> 
> Enhance your text wrapping using two lines of code. No more lonely words at the end of paragraphs, and titles will look much better.
> 
> Will you add this to your CSS reset?
> 
> ```css
> * {
>   text-wrap: pretty;
> }
> h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6 {
>   text-wrap: balance;
> }```

If this feature gets over-adopted by authors eager to improve their sites, to the point where it starts affecting benchmark scores, browser engines will be disincentivized to implement `text-wrap: pretty` as anything other than an alias for `text-wrap: auto`, reducing the utility of the feature to zero.

We encourage the working group to rename the property value to something that reflects its costs as well as its benefits.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/864#issuecomment-2173934184
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/864/2173934184@github.com>