- From: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 17:43:01 -0500
- To: robert@ocallahan.org
- Cc: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
Received on Friday, 11 July 2008 22:43:54 UTC
On Jul 11, 2008, at 5:30 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 10:14 AM, David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com> wrote: > On Jul 11, 2008, at 5:04 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: >> If you're talking about the element-as-background extension, I >> haven't written down a proposed spec for that yet. But when I do, >> it will also ignore clip, opacity and other effects on the >> ancestors of referenced elements. Is that surprising? I can't think >> why you'd want it any other way. > > I believe it might be surprising if you intended to use the feature > to do say reflections or thumbnails. > > I don't think so. Normally a reflection would be drawn in a sibling > element, or at least nearby in the DOM and thus likely to be clipped > by the same ancestor. For thumbnails you usually don't want to see > clipping performed by ancestors; for example you might want to show > thumbnails of slides that are scrolled out of view. If you want > clipping to be shown, you would normally just make the clipping > ancestor the element-as-background. > > Do you have a specific problematic scenario in mind? As you say, thumbnails are probably fine. I think this feature is not a good fit for reflections anyway, so I won't worry about that. dave (hyatt@apple.com)
Received on Friday, 11 July 2008 22:43:54 UTC