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

Re: [css, bug of specification] negative margins, painting order, stacking context.

From: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 11:33:45 -0600
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-id: <5CEFFD3F-B403-4B47-8782-5B88FF767333@apple.com>
To: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>

On Feb 11, 2009, at 6:37 AM, Anton Prowse wrote:

>
> Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
>> Anton Prowse wrote here:
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Feb/0276.html
>> [I've reduced the message as it became fairly big]
>> Consider these two rendering schema of rendering content of some  
>> container:
>> (I am considering statics and floats only for brevity)
>> A) Current one that is in the spec. now:
>> 1) Draw backgrounds of all children.
>> 2) Draw all floats (each float establish it own stacking context).
>> 3) Draw text, inlines and inline-blocks of static elements on top  
>> of all that. Inline, and inline-block elements also establish
>> their own stacking context.
>> And another one that I was talking about,
>> B) elements are rendered as if each of them establish their
>> own stacking context:
>> 1) Draw all children atomically (background and content on top
>> of it) - thus each child establish it own stacking context.
>> 2) Draw all floats atomically - as in current spec.
>> Let's put aside negative margins feature for a while.
>
>
> Sorry for the length of this reply, but I really think that it's worth
> clarifying the terminology here so that we can understand each  
> other.  A
> "stacking context" is more than just an atomically-painted
> background+text unit.
>
> There are two kinds of stacking context.  The first, let's call it a
> "painting context" or "pseudo--stacking context" is (loosely) an
> atomically-painted unit of backgrounds, floated non-positioned
> dependents and inlines. Many things form painting contexts: the root
> element, floats, inline blocks, inline tables, and positioned  
> elements.
> On the other hand, many things don't: static in-flow blocks and
> inlines for example.

Hopefully overflow could be considered for pseudo-stacking context  
status as well. :)

dave
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2009 17:34:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:16 GMT