- From: Florian Rivoal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 06:01:51 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
In terms of the internal tree structure the browser is maintaining, I suppose you're right, but it terms of actual changes to the layout, it seems to me that we're actually safe, because even if we're in the situation you describe, item 3 of [this section of the spec](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-containment/#containment-layout) (which as discussed in #396, should be rephrased to “If the contents of the element overflow the element, they must be treated as ink overflow”) requires that any overflow from the element B is treated as ink overflow, and thus doesn't affect the layout of anything outside of B. So, it doesn't seem to me that making `contain:layout` elements containing blocks for absolute and fixed positioned descendants is strictly speaking needed. With that said, if I am wrong, or if I am right but implementation would be difficult, I don't see a big downside to adding such a requirement. -- GitHub Notification of comment by frivoal Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/404#issuecomment-239657741 using your GitHub account
Received on Sunday, 14 August 2016 06:01:58 UTC