W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-bugzilla@w3.org > February 2012

[Bug 16033] New: Stacking contexts: incorrect edit made to 9.9.1

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 16:09:00 +0000
To: public-css-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-16033-5148@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16033

           Summary: Stacking contexts: incorrect edit made to 9.9.1
           Product: CSS
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: CSS Level 2
        AssignedTo: bert@w3.org
        ReportedBy: antonsforums@yahoo.co.uk
         QAContact: public-css-bugzilla@w3.org


As part of the edits made in the move from WD
(http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-CSS2-20101207/visuren.html#z-index) to PR
(http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/PR-CSS2-20110412/visuren.html#z-index), an error was
introduced in 9.9.1.

The following WD text:

  # Positioned elements with 'z-index: auto' (in layer 6), floats
  # (layer 4), inline blocks (layer 5), and inline tables (layer 5),
  # are painted as if those elements generated new stacking contexts,
  # except that their positioned descendants and any child stacking
  # contexts take part in the current stacking context.

was changed in the PR to:

  # <ins>Within each stacking context,</ins> positioned elements with
  # stack level 0 (in layer 6), non-positioned floats (layer 4),
  # inline blocks (layer 5), and inline tables (layer 5), are painted
  # as if those elements <ins>themselves</ins> generated new stacking
  # contexts, except that their positioned descendants and any
  # <ins>would-be</ins> child stacking contexts take part in the
  # current stacking context.

Note that, apart from the three indicated edits that were discussed on the
mailing list [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Mar/0108.html],
there was also a change from "positioned elements with 'z-index: auto'" to
"positioned elements with stack level 0".

This change was not discussed, to my knowledge.  Unfortunately it is incorrect,
since positioned elements with stack level 0 include positioned elements with
'z-index: 0', and these latter elements /don't/ have the described "almost
stacking context" behaviour.  (Rather, they have full stacking context
behaviour.)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 20 February 2012 16:09:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 20 February 2012 16:09:03 GMT