- From: clchambers via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2025 09:27:01 +0000
- To: public-fxtf-archive@w3.org
Maya-Fey has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/fxtf-drafts: == [filter-effects-2] Ambiguity in spec over whether root elements of child iframes form Backdrop Root == As seen in this codepen: https://codepen.io/Claire-Chambers/pen/ZYbNeJy The definition of backdrop root is specified twice. Once: ``` A Backdrop Root is formed, anywhere in the document, by an element in any of the following scenarios. See [ยง 3.2 Backdrop Root Triggers](https://drafts.fxtf.org/filter-effects-2/#BackdropRootTriggers) for more details on each: * The root element of the document (HTML). ... ``` Which would seem to imply that the root element of an iframe should be a backdrop root, since every iframe has its own document. However, section 3.2 backdrop root triggers merely states. ``` Obvious triggers: The root element. There is nothing above the root element, so it must form a Backdrop Root. ``` which could imply that only the root element of the root document should be a backdrop root, as document roots of iframes still have something 'above' them and therefore don't have to form a backdrop root. As it stands, chrome and firefox both treat iframes like any other element, ie, not a backdrop root. There's no *technical* reason iframes should form a backdrop root, since iframes are already allowed to have transparent backgrounds and will quite happily allow its parent frame to shine through, if the developer wants it. That being said, I certainly thought it was 'weird' when I discovered this, and it's definitely somewhat non-intuitive. Regardless of which behavior is better, the spec should be clarified. cc: @progers Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/fxtf-drafts/issues/610 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 11 September 2025 09:27:02 UTC