- From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 11:08:40 -0700
- To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- CC: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
On Jun 12, 2013, at 11:00 AM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote: > > 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. > > To what spec would it be added? I'd be happy to change the compositing spec so I can point there. "I am just saying that we should define the stacking context for SVG 1.1 already."
Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2013 18:09:57 UTC