- From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 17:35:24 -0700
- To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- CC: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
On Jun 12, 2013, at 5:31 PM, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> wrote: > Doug Schepers wrote: >>> 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? > > The z-index SVG 2 requirement is assigned to Tab: > > http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/SVG2_Requirements_Commitments > > Hasn't been added to the spec yet, though. > > As for SVG 1.1, I don't think it's a good use of time to update that > document to define stacking contexts; let's just do it in SVG 2 itself. > Defining which features cause stacking contexts to be created in SVG > is most of the work for defining how z-index works anyway, so if you > (Dirk or Rik) wanted to do that, I'd say feel free to. We decided to publish a new Errata for SVG 1.1 during the last F2F anyway. This could be a one liner that makes SVG 1.1 compatible with all other CSS specs. Stacking context in the context of SVG 1.1 is really not a big deal. Greetings, Dirk
Received on Thursday, 13 June 2013 00:36:26 UTC