Re: [compositing] isolation property should be renamed

On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote:

>
> On Dec 4, 2014, at 8:15 PM, Philip Rogers <pdr@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> > I would argue it is the best time to change this name, as the feature
> has not yet gained popularity.
> >
> > The blend- prefix Erik suggested sounds great to me, and it solves the
> issue of stomping on generic CSS keywords that could affect other specs.
>
> If renaming would be an option (and I would really like to hear feedback
> from WebKit and Gecko which are affected by that), then ‘blend-‘ doesn’t
> seem to be the right option for reasons that I explained in my previous
> mail. The ‘mix-‘ prefix was introduced for combining compositing and
> blending later and to align both in a potential shorthand property ‘mix'.


Note that 'isolation' is also defined to limit the backdrop for background
filters. [1]

1:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-filter-effects-1-20141125/#valdef-in-backgroundimage


> >
> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Dec 4, 2014, at 12:39 PM, Erik Dahlström <ed@opera.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 03:54:19 +0100, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> If all the isolation property does is create a stacking context
> [1][2]
> > >>> then it seems like it should be called stacking-context: true to
> reveal
> > >>> it's purpose,
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Its purpose is not to create stacking context. It's designed to limit
> the
> > >> backdrop for its children with blending.
> > >> The fact that the spec says to do this using a stacking context, is
> for
> > >> implementors; not authors.
> > >>
> > >> As Erik Dahlström noted, this property also applies to SVG which has
> no
> > >> stacking contexts. [1]
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> otherwise we're just going to have blog posts about the "secret css
> hacks"
> > >>> to create stacking contexts using isolation: isolate as stacking
> contexts
> > >>> have all kinds of other side effects.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> How would this be different from "will-change: transform;"?
> > >> That creates a stacking context with the same side effects.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> The property also does not seem to be specific to blending, and the
> > >>> isolation naming is confusing given that there's talk of layout/style
> > >>> isolation, bidi isolation, and now blend isolation.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> It's meant to be used with blending and filters but as with many other
> > >> properties, it has side effects.
> > >>
> > >> The next level of the spec will also reintroduce support for
> non-isolated
> > >> blending. Since this is expensive, authors will be able to opt into
> this
> > >> with this same property. Non-isolated blending will not introduce a
> > >> stacking context.
> > >>
> > >> I agree that the name is somewhat confusing. We (= mailing list + css
> > >> group) went over different options a couple of years ago and this was
> the
> > >> one that we eventually settled on.
> > >>
> > >> 1:
> > >>
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msg/blink-dev/WoLwgoPB-GE/LITzZ2ifVVsJ
> > >
> > > Was having a 'blend-' prefix ever discussed (as in: blend-isolation)?
> I couldn't find any mentions of it when searching through the w3
> mailinglists.
> > >
> > > Would 'blend-isolation' be an acceptable new name?
> >
> > ‘isolation' will likely isolate for compositing as well. Compositing is
> not part of level 1 but will be added into future specs eventually. This is
> one reason why we decided to have the mix- prefix for blending.
> >
> > I agree with Rik here that the purpose of 'isolation' is not related to
> having a stacking context. It may cause the creation of a stacking context
> just like filter, transform, opacity and many other properties may do.
> >
> > As a note: We have two more implementations beside Blink which support
> the ‘isolation’ property. One (Safari/WebKit) is shipping with it in a
> release version already and another (Firefox) is about to ship in the
> stable branch soon. IMO this is the worst timing to change names or even
> functionality.
> >
> > Greetings,
> > Dirk
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Erik Dahlstrom, Web Technology Developer, Opera Software
> > > Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
> > >
> >
> >
>
>