- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:29:23 +0000
- To: public-css-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15943
Summary: Should transform-style behave specially for tables (as
it seems to in WebKit)?
Product: CSS
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: Transforms
AssignedTo: smfr@me.com
ReportedBy: ayg@aryeh.name
QAContact: public-css-bugzilla@w3.org
CC: roc@ocallahan.org, cmarrin@apple.com,
eoconnor@apple.com, dino@apple.com, dschulze@adobe.com
Consider these two test-cases:
data:text/html,<!doctype html>
<div style="transform: rotatex(90deg); transform-style: preserve-3d">
<div style="display: table-cell; transform: rotatex(90deg)">Some text</div>
</div>
data:text/html,<!doctype html>
<div style="transform: rotatex(90deg); transform-style: preserve-3d">
<table><tr>
<td style="transform: rotatex(90deg)">Some text
</table>
</div>
In Gecko, the text vanishes in both test-cases. In Chrome 18 dev, the text is
made upside-down in both test-cases. Taken literally, the specification would
seem to say that the text should be rotated in the first case (since every
element has preserve-3d), and vanish in the second case (since there are
intervening elements that don't have preserve-3d).
It seems Chrome (WebKit?) works something like this: any element with any of
the table display types (table, inline-table, table-*) will be part of its
parent's 3D rendering context, if any, even if transform-style: flat is
specified. Is this how WebKit actually works? What should the specification
require?
Related Mozilla bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=722777
--
Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2012 17:29:28 UTC