Re: Additional value for the visibility property

Ph. Wittenbergh wrote:
> 
> 
> On Jul 9, 2008, at 8:17 AM, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
> 
>> While we are on this page 
>> (http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-color/#transparency ) ...
>>
>> Can we change:
>>
>> "Conceptually, after the element (including its children) is rendered 
>> into an RGBA offscreen image, the opacity setting specifies how to 
>> blend the offscreen rendering into the current composite rendering."
>>
>> to
>>
>> "Conceptually, after the element (including its *in-flow* children) is 
>> rendered into an RGBA offscreen image, the opacity setting specifies 
>> how to blend the offscreen rendering into the current composite 
>> rendering."
>>
>> note *in-flow* there.
> 
> Why should that be limited to in-flow elements ?
> 
>> [...]
>>
>> Renders in:
>> FF3 and Safari - div.kid as not transparent.
>> Opera - div.kid as transparent.
> 
> In Gecko 1.9 (fx 3) and WebKit, the div.kid _is_ transparent. The whole 
> block as one unit is made transparent. In Opera, the parent and the kid 
> are made transparent as separate units (I think).
> 
> A variant of your test case:
> <http://dev.l-c-n.com/css3/ap-opacity3.html>
> using a couple of background images to visualise the transparency.

Yeah, my bad, FF3 does render it transparently.

The source of my confusion was rendering in Opera.

It appears as it draws only inflow children on the off-screen buffer.
And all out-of-flow children use their own off-screen buffers.

IMHO this behavior is more natural than what does FF3.
Try to compare your document in Opera and in FF and you will get an
idea of what I mean.

That is what I would like to clarify - how exactly it should be rendered.

-- 
Andrew Fedoniouk.

http://terrainformatica.com

Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2008 03:27:32 UTC