Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-gaps-1] Bikeshedding rule-paint-order (#12540)

The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-gaps-1] Bikeshedding rule-paint-order`.

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;Kurt> kbabbitt: suggestion for renaming rule-paint-order to rule-overlap<br>
&lt;Kurt> kbabbitt: what this property does is determine whether row decorations are painted above column decorations<br>
&lt;Kurt> kbabbitt: I've seen arguments in both directions, motivation is that paint-order sounded jargony. otoh we do have other properties that use "order", such as "paint-order" in SVG<br>
&lt;Kurt> kbabbitt: wanted to run a poll<br>
&lt;Kurt> Javier: I can see both points, someone suggested overlap. I first agreed, but someone else mentioned precedent for order, which I do agree with to align with already existing vocabulary.<br>
&lt;Kurt> SebastionZ: I mentioned order properties<br>
&lt;Kurt> miriam: Do we use order for paint order? I thought we used z-index for what's on top.<br>
&lt;Kurt> SebastionZ: We do have order in paint-order - in flex and grid, it's also specifying the order in which things are render in addition to laid out<br>
&lt;Kurt> astearns: It's a secondary thing, paint order is incidental<br>
&lt;Kurt> SebastionZ: In SVG we have a paint-order property<br>
&lt;Kurt> astearns: Is the difference in how order is used in CSS a good reason to choose a different name<br>
&lt;alisonmaher> q+<br>
&lt;Kurt> mirian: It's not a good reason for keeping that name, feels jargony because I wouldn't understand what that means without understanding browser paint as a concept, feels jargony and I don't see the connection to other order properties. I think rule overlap makes more sense.<br>
&lt;Kurt> kbabbitt: Can we have some other term in CSS to use what we do with paint?<br>
&lt;Kurt> miriam: z-index is the main one<br>
&lt;Kurt> kbabbitt: I guess so, rule-z-index?<br>
&lt;Kurt> miriam: it's a thing that people think of as "layering" in design tools, but we have a different concept<br>
&lt;astearns> ack alisonmaher<br>
&lt;Kurt> amaher: I agree with miriam, current naming might be confusing, rule-overlap might be more intuitive based on name alone<br>
&lt;Kurt> astearns: I'm hearing maybe not overwhelming consensus, but it sounds like we could go with rule-overlap because the uses we have for order in CSS aren't quite the same<br>
&lt;Kurt> kbabbitt: I'm hearing the same thing, if folks are ok with that, I'm ok, or straw poll<br>
&lt;Kurt> SebastionZ: I don't hold a strong opinion, but we should do a straw poll<br>
&lt;Kurt> astearns: we'll do a straw poll in irc, two options are 1) keep paint order 2) change to rule-overlap<br>
&lt;miriam> 2<br>
&lt;alisonmaher> 2<br>
&lt;kbabbitt> 2<br>
&lt;SebastianZ> 1<br>
&lt;diekus> 2<br>
&lt;astearns> 2<br>
&lt;oSamDavis> 1<br>
&lt;javierct> 2<br>
&lt;Kurt> oSamDavis: to Sebastions point, I feel order is more css jargon rather than order in flex in grid, but like you mentioned, it's secondary. I don't have a strong opinion but I prefer order over overlap<br>
&lt;Kurt> astearns: we are resolved for rule-overlap, value names are also ok<br>
&lt;kbabbitt> scribe+ kbabbitt<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12540#issuecomment-3160594063 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Wednesday, 6 August 2025 15:15:41 UTC