- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 13:54:23 -0800
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert at ocallahan.org> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Robert O'Callahan <robert at ocallahan.org>wrote: > >> Having the rest of the page visible under the fullscreen element is not >> expected and I think we should default to avoiding it. background:black >> seemed like the right thing for video and a reasonable default for other >> kinds of element. Maybe the background:black rule could be at the UA >> not-important level? >> > > Glenn Maynard wrote: > > The background: black makes a basic case strange: fullscreening > <div>hello</div> will result in black text on a black background. Maybe > having that on video:fullscreen and maybe img:fullscreen makes sense, but it > doesn't seem right in general. > > > That's a reasonable point but I'm not sure how to solve it. Making other > page content visible behind <div>hello</div> (which would happen if we just > remove the background rule) is just as unexpected, maybe more so. > > Brainstorming: > -- Maybe we could create a new CSS color meaning "the document background > color (including the fallback color used when the viewport background is > nominally 'transparent')" and use that here? > -- Try a rule ":fullscreen-ancestor > > :not(:fullscreen-ancestor):not(:fullscreen) { display:none; }"? Or > "opacity:0"? > I really want to avoid solutions that require magical new CSS behaviors. > > I think "video:fullscreen { background:black; }" seems like a good idea in > any case. I think we should go the route that the <dialog> element did in Ted's change proposal and have a pseudo-element that gets created when an element is fullscreened. Simple and easy, and trivial for the author to manipulate to get most effects they could want. ~TJ
Received on Monday, 14 November 2011 13:54:23 UTC