- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 13:26:47 -0800
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 9:50 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > 1. We discussed adding ::spelling-error and ::grammar-error alongside > ::selection, > but there was no resolution at the F2F. Do we want to add these? Yup. > 2. The current list of acceptable properties is > - color > - background-color > - cursor > - outline > - text-decoration > - text-emphasis-color (but not text-emphasis) > - text-shadow > > a. Are these acceptable? > b. Should any other properties be added? > c. All but the first two are currently optional. Should any others be > required? Why aren't we just using the ::first-line list? > 3. All four browser engines drop the OS colors with when either of 'color' > or 'background-color' is unspecified. This means we have to violate > dbaron's #2 requirement (that the OS colors be representable as a UA > style rule): > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Oct/0268.html > > Given that, I'm assuming this is a Web-compat requirement. > Shall this be required behavior? Assuming it's web-compat, yes. > 4. Most implementations currently draw the text decoration with its > original color. This looks super weird, so I'm thinking we > should require using the selection-specified color (when > there is one), which is what IE does. Are there any concerns with > this? > > http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?%3C!DOCTYPE%20html%3E%0A%3Cstyle%3E%0A%20%20%3A%3Aselection%20%7B%20background%3A%20blue%3B%20color%3A%20white%3B%20%7D%0A%3C%2Fstyle%3E%0A%3Cp%3ESome%20%3Cu%3Eunderlined%3C%2Fu%3E%20%3Cstrike%3Estruck-through%3C%2Fstrike%3E%20text. No, it seems pretty straightforwardly wrong. I suspect it's just a matter of the way the existing decoration code works (not changing color unless you explicitly create a new decoration). While this is technically the same thing that'll happen if you just put a <span> in there with a different 'color' and 'background-color', I think this is common enough that we should magic it up. > 5. If a ::selection rule specifies inheritance, does it inherit from its > originating element (i.e. the unselected text) or does it inherit from > the parent ::selection? > a. Presto implements inheritance from the parent ::selection > b. Gecko/Blink implement inheritance from the originating element > c. IE does half and half. > > The interesting question here for authors is probably less about > inheritance and more about "how do you erase a rule". If we go with > Gecko/Blink, then the 'unset' keyword is the only way to have a > previously-styled special::selection use the same colors as its > parent::selection. > > We could also leave this undefined for now, since it's unlikely to > matter to authors (as long as 'unset' is implemented). > > What does the WG prefer? > A. inherit from parent ::selection > B. inherit from originating element > C. undefined > D. Need to ask my dev team what they think, I'll take an action > to do that, so give me more time. B, because it's the closest to consensus, and there are technical ways to achieve either situation. > 6. What to do wrt the CSSOM section? > A. Keep as-is it for FPWD. > B. Drop it for FPWD, replace it with an issue that we need an OM. > C. Fix these issues [...] or drop these features [...] and then > publish FPWD. > D. Hang on, need more time to review. D > 7. All implementations draw text-shadow over the selection color. > This does not seem user-friendly, particularly when that shadow > is an incompatible color. Some options: > A. Add this UA style rule or its equivalent effect: > :root::selection { text-shadow: none; } > B. Draw text-shadow underneath the selection background. > C. Leave as-is, we like it. > (I prefer option A.) Can you give an example of it not being friendly? It seems fine on, say, the heading of http://xanthir.com/recipes, whether it gets the default desktop Chrome blue selection, or the default CrOS extra-light selection. So far, I'm with C. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2014 21:27:37 UTC