W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2011

Re: Proposing content-hidden for background-image and img content

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:44:16 -0700
Message-ID: <4E68FEF0.9060509@jumis.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 9/8/2011 10:21 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Charles Pritchard<chuck@jumis.com>  wrote:
>> What about borrowing the current terminology from HTML5, and calling it:
>> "content: transparent;"
>> The transparent keyword would only apply to the element (not the pseudo
>> element, which is already
>> covered by inhibit and other flags).
> What would content:transparent do?  In HTML "transparent" is just a
> term for the semantics of some elements.
> (We've also discussed a display:transparent that would be thematically
> similar to HTML's notion of "transparent" - the element wouldn't
> generate a box in the box tree (similar to display:none), but its
> children still would.)

It would maintain the content box sizing, while not-showing any elements.
Basically, the same thing that <canvas> does.

canvas { content: transparent; }

Received on Thursday, 8 September 2011 17:44:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:03 UTC