Re: [CSS21] stack level definitions in 9.9.1

>
>  *** Your proposal regarding auto and '0' is not included here. I found it
>> confusing as it could be read as conflicting with the description of layer 8
>> in Appendix E which does make a difference between auto/0 positioned
>> descendants.
>>
>
> Indeed, there /is/ a difference.  But that difference is not related to
> stack levels and painting layers, and hence there is no conflict.  (All
> such elements all lie on the same painting layer [#6 in the list] of
> whatever transpires to be their closest ancestor stacking context.)  The
> difference is in how the closest ancestor stacking context is determined.
>
Sylvain, to complement what Anton is saying by rephrasing it: the difference
between auto and 0 descendants that you note in layer 8 of E regards how
they paint (or don't paint) THEIR descendants, and not which comes first
between the two in the current stacking context (ie. stack level).

Justin Poirier
Classroom306.com