- From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 20:27:16 -0700
- To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- CC: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>, Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>
On Apr 10, 2013, at 8:21 PM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote: > > > the exact same issue will happen if blending applies to elements (in which > > case stacking contexts are created). > > For instance, an element with blending that is a child of an element that > > uses fixed positioning will render differently today in FF and WK. > > > > Dropping background-blend-mode will not solve this problem. > > Dropping background-blend-mode simplifies it a lot, because you only > have to consider elements that form stacking contexts when > addressing it. > > All, > > I would like to start this thread up again. > > I thought that the problem of what constitutes the backdrop of the stacking context (= mix-blend-mode) or the image (= background-blend-mode) is the same but Sylvain almost convinced me that that is not the case. > If it's really is too difficult, I would have no issue to change the spec so background images will blend and composite only with each other. I would have thought that this is what people expect anyway. I support this change. For the other things you have the mix property. > > David, > can you explain why you think that background-blend-mode is harder to specify (or implement)? > > see also: http://dbaron.org/log/20130306-compositing-blending Greetings, Dirk
Received on Thursday, 11 April 2013 03:27:49 UTC