- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2013 06:01:36 -0700
- To: Justin Novosad <junov@google.com>
- Cc: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, Tom Wiltzius <wiltzius@chromium.org>, Brian Salomon <bsalomon@chromium.org>, WHAT Working Group <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Mark Callow <callow.mark@artspark.co.jp>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
On Jul 3, 2013 4:38 PM, "Justin Novosad" <junov@google.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Tom Wiltzius <wiltzius@chromium.org> wrote: > > > On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Mark Callow < callow.mark@artspark.co.jp > > >wrote: > > > > > I thought some pretty strong objections were raised to text decoration. > > > Why are you actively developing it? > > > > > > > There were some concerns cited, as well as some unresolved debate about the > > exact shape of the API, but my read is that the objections aren't > > sufficiently fundamental to block prototyping (such that we might gain some > > implementation experience to inform the API's development). > > > > > The strong objections were more general opposition to the use of text in 2D > canvas because of its various shortcomings (accessibility, crawling, etc) > IMHO, that is a completely different debate than the question of whether or > not the canvas text should have more bells and whistles. That seems highly related. Adding more features to functionality that is bad for users seems to encourage authors to create pages that are bad for users. Also, it seems strange to spend time implementing new features while actively discouraging people from using them. / Jonas
Received on Monday, 8 July 2013 13:02:10 UTC