- From: Sean Hogan <shogun70@westnet.com.au>
- Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2012 13:51:52 +1000
On 5/04/12 3:31 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 1:05 AM, Anne van Kesteren<annevk at opera.com> wrote: >> On Wed, 04 Apr 2012 01:14:43 +0200, Ian Hickson<ian at hixie.ch> wrote: >>> If this works, then I'll use this for<dialog>. >> How does this work for nested browsing contexts? Currently using<iframe >> allowfullscreen> (not in HTML yet) you can fullscreen elements embedded via >> an<iframe>. Would we then have to push the<iframe> element on the stack >> and make its height and width cover the viewport, and then push the element >> in question inside the<iframe> on the stack, or do we want to deal with >> this in another way? > The thinking so far is that we don't do anything special for dialogs. > They don't escape their<iframe>, and the<iframe> doesn't have any > special response to a dialog spawning within it, unlike for > fullscreen. > > >> Which pseudo-classes are we keeping? :fullscreen still seems useful, >> :fullscreen-ancestor probably not. What are the new default styles going to >> be? > In the www-style thread I gave a proposal for the new styling. I'll > reproduce it here: > > :fullscreen { > position: fixed; > top: 0; left: 0; right: 0; bottom: 0; > } > > :fullscreen::backdrop { > position: fixed; > top: 0; left: 0; right: 0; bottom: 0; > background: black; > } > > dialog[modal] { > position: center; > } > > dialog[modal]::backdrop { > position: fixed; > top: 0; left: 0; right: 0; bottom: 0; > } So the ::backdrop could be styled to not cover the whole page? Could it default to a "top" layer, but optionally be given a z-index? Sean
Received on Wednesday, 4 April 2012 20:51:52 UTC