On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com> wrote: > That is what I would like to clarify - how exactly it should be rendered. > I think it's clear that according to the spec it should be rendered the way Gecko and Webkit render it. If you're suggesting that the spec should be changed --- this has been specified and interoperably implemented in Gecko and Webkit for years, so I think you'd need a pretty strong argument. Personally it feels unnatural to me to render an element and its descendants as a single composition group but carve out an exception for descendants that happen to be out-of-flow. (Although I'm not actually sure what you're proposing, since there might be descendants which are out-of-flow but still have the element as their containing block ancestor.) Also note that if the author really wants an out-of-flow element to be composited seperately they can usually move it in the document outside of the container with 'opacity' and give it its own 'opacity' to achieve that. Rob -- "He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." [Isaiah 53:5-6]
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2008 11:09:07 UTC