- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:46:52 -0800
- To: robert@ocallahan.org
- CC: HÃ¥kon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Robert O'Callahan wrote: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:01 AM, fantasai wrote: >>> Robert O'Callahan wrote: >>> >>> Just add a sentence to section 5: >>> "If a column rule is wider than its gap, the column rule will >>> overlap adjacent column boxes. **Column rules are painted above >>> the multi-column element's background and border (if any) and >>> below any descendants of the element.**" >> >> I'd make that "immediately above". > > I don't put it past the CSS WG to add a feature which displays above the > border but below column-rules :-). > >> Are there any cases where descendants of an element can be painted below >> it? > > Yeah actually there are, when the element is not a stacking context :-(. > > Hakon's text is OK. It's not OK if it's wrong. :) I'd make it "immediately above" and remove "and below any descendants of the element". If we introduce a feature which displays above the border but below the column-rules, then it's the responsibility of that spec to specify the z-index with relation to both borders and column-rules. ~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 24 February 2009 08:18:08 UTC