- 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