- From: Bo Cupp via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2021 00:38:49 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Clarifying this one comment above from the scribe: > BoCupp: It only requires them to pay attention to this one thing, ranges. I was saying that optimizations around painting containment on an element E need to consider ranges that are intersecting E - whether or not they are live or static. A static range that is invalid (because of disconnected nodes) is no longer intersecting E, just like a live range that has its boundary points updated can be made to no longer intersect E. I think the reason this issue exists is because of a perception that tracking tree changes under the scope of E can enable browser optimizations, but what we're trying to point out is that ranges and the pseudo-element rules that style them also need special consideration (and likely special code written) to track when to invalidate the painting of elements they intersect. I'd like to put the onus on browser implementors to write that code, rather than have authors experience a strange behavior when intersecting elements with containment. -- GitHub Notification of comment by BoCupp-Microsoft Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4598#issuecomment-984185713 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 2 December 2021 00:38:51 UTC