- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 09:38:51 -0700
- To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Aug 17, 2010, at 12:17 AM, Håkon Wium Lie wrote: > Also sprach Brad Kemper: > >>> Further, I'm not sure all the column-rule-style values make sense. >>> It's nice for the values to be same as border-style, but I'm uncertain >>> if 'none', 'hidden', 'inset' and 'outset' should be there. >> >> I think 'inset' and 'outset' are not used that much for borders >> anymore either, are they? I imagine that until the mid-90s calls >> and asks for its embossing-against-gray-backgrounds trend back, >> these styles are as useful for column rules as they are for >> borders. > > For borders, which typically are present on all four sides of a box, > 'inset' and 'outset' still makes some sense (although their use most > probably is limited). Column rules, however, only appear between > columns and having 'inset' rule between several adjacent columns makes > less sense, optically. Oh, right. Sorry, I was thinking about "groove" and "ridge" styles. Inset and Outset does seem much less useful for unconnected straight lines. > There's little damage in having the values there, and the > implementation cost is also low. So I'm not sure it's worth taking > them out at this stage. Hmm. Hard to imagine them being missed if they are removed. Hard to imagine even a hacky use for them.
Received on Tuesday, 17 August 2010 16:39:27 UTC