- From: Robert Flack via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2023 15:24:09 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Given that opacity has established that we can paint the content independently without containment, I think technically option 1 should work. My main concern is that non-contained descendants will result in the capture being much larger than the developer realizes (e.g. bounding box of the capture element to the current position of the descendants), however perhaps #8282 will help with this and make it less of an issue. I was also concerned that the inconsistency between this behavior (which effectively allows animating transform without containment) where normally any non-none transform forces containment would be confusing for developers. I can understand how forcing containment can be surprising to developers, but it is the way that [transforms work](https://www.w3.org/TR/css-transforms-1/#containing-block-for-all-descendants) which developers already likely have to deal with. I'm not sure what lead to transforms doing this, and if that rationale is applicable here. Perhaps opacity behaving differently is a good reason we don't need this. -- GitHub Notification of comment by flackr Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8139#issuecomment-1422773651 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2023 15:24:11 UTC