- From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 02:50:59 +0000
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Hi CSS WG members, The SVG WG discussed https://github.com/w3c/fxtf-drafts/issues/130: How should UAs behave on invalid mask, clipPath or filter? As invalid, the WG looked at mask, clipPath or filter * having no content * having only child elements that do not follow the content model * having child elements that partly follow and not follow the content model * mask, clip-path, filter with missing/invalid URLs or not-yet available resources * circular dependencies Upfront I tested Edge, Firefox, Safari and Chrome and compared the different results: https://github.com/w3c/fxtf-drafts/issues/130#issuecomment-390981529 The SVG WG suggests that the CSS WG resolves on the following rules (https://github.com/w3c/fxtf-drafts/issues/130#issuecomment-532981392): • For clipping and masking, we follow the behavior of Edge, WebKit, and Blink in the https://github.com/w3c/fxtf-drafts/issues/130#issuecomment-390981529 table • If a referenced filter is missing or invalid, the side effects like stacking context are still preserved. Unless there are concerns to those suggestions we don’t need to bring this up in a call on the CSS WG. In this case it would be great if we could use the async resolution process with an appropriate period to review the issue. @Alan, @Rossen? Thanks, Dirk
Received on Saturday, 21 September 2019 02:51:25 UTC