- From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 10:05:16 -0700
- To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- CC: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
On Jun 12, 2013, at 9:55 AM, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote: > Hi, folks- > > On 6/12/13 7:48 AM, Dirk Schulze wrote: >> >> On Jun 12, 2013, at 4:33 AM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> How would you define it for SVG since it has no concept of a >>> 'stacking context'? For HTML, you eventually end up at the >>> 'elaborate description of stacking contexts' but there is no such >>> thing for SVG. >> >> You can add it to the SVG specification :) (And in fact we should add >> it to the third edition of SVG 1.1 and at some point to CSS >> directly.) However, this doesn't even matter for compositing at the >> moment. For compositing it is necessary to say that every property >> which creates a stacking context does also create an isolation group. >> And all the listed properties in Compositing do create a stacking >> context. That's it. > > I seem to recall that we talked about adding a simplified stacking > context for SVG, along with a z-index... Cameron, what's the status on that? It still wasn't added. I am just saying that we should define the stacking context for SVG 1.1 already. It is more of a symbolic definition there, since it doesn't change anything. SVG2 can extend it from there. Greetings, Dirk > > Regards- > -Doug
Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2013 17:06:23 UTC