Re: Utility of background-composite and background-blend-mode?

On Thursday 2013-03-14 09:55 -0700, Rik Cabanier wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 9:19 AM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thursday 2013-03-14 05:44 -0700, Dirk Schulze wrote:
> > > No, not WebKit's rules. And I do not think that we want to specify
> > > buffering. A behavior in situations like scrolling for blending
> > > should be specified and browser need to follow. I see that this
> > > can be challenging but would be most desireabale. After all,
> > > scrolling should not affect the browser experience of the user on
> > > the visual side - especially for blending.
> >
> > As I said in http://dbaron.org/log/20130306-compositing-blending , I
> > think there's a lot less to specify and a lot less to drive towards
> > interoperability if compositing and blending operations are limited
> > to things that create stacking contexts.  This limitation would be
> > present if background-blend-mode and background-composite are
> > dropped, which I think should be done.
> 
> 
> David,
> 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.

-David

-- 
𝄞   L. David Baron                         http://dbaron.org/   𝄂
𝄢   Mozilla                           http://www.mozilla.org/   𝄂

Received on Thursday, 14 March 2013 17:22:00 UTC