Great! Is everyone OK with the term 'stacking context' for SVG? They are different from the ones in HTML (= they don't follow the z-index note [1]) so this could be confusing. 1: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/zindex.html On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> wrote: > Dirk Schulze wrote: > >> 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. >> > > I don't remember discussing publishing more errata for SVG 1.1, and I > can't see anything in the meeting minutes about it. What would the erratum > have been for? > > I think it's useful just to have the stacking context definition for SVG > written down somewhere. If you feel like it would be more useful to have > it as an erratum for SVG 1.1, rather than defined in SVG 2, please propose > some wording and then we can discuss it in the SVG WG. >
Received on Thursday, 13 June 2013 01:32:51 UTC