- From: Maciej Stachowiak <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 17:53:18 -0700
- To: w3ctag/design-reviews <design-reviews@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Received on Friday, 24 May 2019 00:53:41 UTC
Not sure what is meant by "addressed inconsistencies" but to be clear, Chrome implemented something different from WebKit, there is not consensus that this is correct, and there's an issue marker reflecting the lack of consensus (as shown in that issue). CSS WG agreed to the PR on the condition that the lack of consensus be recorded. It would be really good to get the spec and all browsers on the same page. But it's wrong to imply that the spec has resolved this, and that WebKit is buggy by not matching it. At the heart of this disagreement is that WebKit's model is apparently hard to implement in Chrome's compositor, but Chrome's model is hard to implement in WebKit's compositor. "Let's spec what Chrome does" is not an entirely satisfactory resolution to this dilemma. We (WebKit folks) also believe that our model is more useful to authors. And we are also remiss in not having written down our model in more formal spec language. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/353#issuecomment-495434302
Received on Friday, 24 May 2019 00:53:41 UTC