W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2009

Re: Proposal for overflow painting order

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 06:31:14 -0600
Message-ID: <dd0fbad0902050431n47387ddci75ab1a540a3ed1a5@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Cc: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>, "www-style@w3.org List" <www-style@w3.org>

On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 10:46 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk
<news@terrainformatica.com> wrote:
> I think we have bug in specification regarding negative margins and stacking
> order.
> Attached is the illustration that demonstrates layout of three
> DOM elements with the one in the middle having
> margin-top: -10px;
> margin-bottom: -10px;
> I think that its stacking order is slightly larger (as shown on the
> illustration) than its normal siblings thus it will be drawn on
> top of *both*, previous and next, its siblings.

Do you mean you *want* it to have a higher stacking order?  Right now
it seems to definitely follow normal stacking order.

Is there any particular reason that you think margins should affect
stacking order here?  I would find that *highly* unintuitive, not to
mention probably page-breaking at this point.

If you *do* want your behavior, it can be achieved by simply setting
the middle element to be position:relative and z-index:2, in addition
to the margins.

Received on Thursday, 5 February 2009 12:31:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:23 UTC