Re: Stacking order question

Ben Cotterell wrote:
>> This appears to have been clarified since the last public draft.
> 
> Not just clarified, changed. It now says positioned descendents are part
> of the parent stacking context. Previously they only were if they had
> z-index of not auto.

In Appendix E....

>> Note also that section 9.5 has similar verbiage:
>>
>>    The contents of floats are stacked as if floats generated new stacking
>>    contexts, except that any positioned elements and elements that
>>    actually create new stacking contexts take part in the float's parent
>>    stacking context.
> 
> Yes, it used to say:
> 
>    The contents of floats are stacked as if floats generated new
>    stacking contexts, except that any elements that actually create new
>    stacking contexts take part in the float's parent's stacking context.
>    A float can overlap other boxes in the normal flow

As I said, the last public draft says the same thing as the current 
internal draft.  I can definitely believe that it got changed from some 
precious draft, sure.

> Anyway, thanks very much for your input. We'll go with the latest public
> draft and I should stop working from my slightly out-of-date pdf.

Er... yes.  Some of the changes that have been happening are pretty 
fundamental to the way you'd design things, if implementing from scratch....

-Boris