Re: [css-transforms] CSS3D breaks with opacity flattening

By the way, this is how Impostors would look like visually:

What do you think /#!/JoePea?

Assuming the implementation could maybe look like: {
  opacity: 0.4;
  transform-style: impostor;

Would this be implementable/spec-able? The idea is the developer wants to
preserve some sort of 3d effect, but would be OK with a grouped effect of
sorts if it's handled to them in a reasonable way.

On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 at 16:14 Amelia Bellamy-Royds <> wrote:

> Regarding:
> On 19 September 2016 at 08:58, Rik Cabanier <> wrote:
>> That doesn't sound very useful because it means that each painting
>> operation will alpha blend/interact with what came before.
>> I can't think of a scenario where you'd want that. Can you provide an
>> example?
> Only the examples previously given in this thread, of having 3D constructs
> that you want to fade in or out as if they were transparent 3D objects.
> The question of applying alpha to individual paint layers instead of to
> elements was me just trying to figure out a way around a "mixed content"
> problem, when an element has child content as well as its own paint.  But I
> confess I haven't thought it through too carefully.  Maybe "each paint
> operation" is too much, and it would be possible to just define two layers:
> background, borders and box shadows, versus child elements and text nodes.
> The alpha adjustments would apply when compositing the child elements and
> text nodes with the background etc., as well as applying to all the
> anonymous text boxes.

Received on Tuesday, 20 September 2016 07:18:05 UTC