- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 18:52:42 +0000
- To: public-css-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16328 --- Comment #6 from Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> 2012-03-15 18:52:41 UTC --- The exact definition in comment 4 is not quite right (e.g. for position:absolute or position:fixed ancestors with transform not "none" should probably be treated as transform parents, and similar for svg:foreignObject), but the general approach makes sense, I think. I wonder how to best keep the definition from getting out of sync with the containing block stuff for positioned elements... -- 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 Thursday, 15 March 2012 18:52:50 UTC