- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 21:04:41 -0700
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: > On 4/28/11 9:20 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> >> Hixie was recently tweaking the HTML side of this (you need a >> mechanism to refer to the detached elements, since Selectors can't >> target them), and was curious why I excluded other replaced elements >> like<iframe>. I don't have a very good answer to this question, so I >> wanted to see what reasoning there was in Gecko to not allow other >> detached replaced elements to be used. > > In Gecko, detached iframe's can't be rendered at all. The data structures > that compute style data and create a box tree are only allowed to exist when > the iframe itself has a box. Maciej brought up the good point that an SVG <img> needs to be processed in basically the same way as an <iframe> does. Is there just a special exception for this that <iframe>s don't share? >> (The best I've got so far is that all the data necessary to display >> img/video/canvas is present automatically, as part of the elements' >> natures, so it's easy to present that data via element() even if the >> element's not in the DOM. > > Precisely. > >> However, an<iframe> needs to actually do >> layout on its contents to be displayed; this *can* be done without a >> surrounding document. > > In Gecko at the moment it cannot. Cool, thanks. ~TJ
Received on Friday, 29 April 2011 04:05:28 UTC