- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 07:35:08 -0700
- To: robert@ocallahan.org
- Cc: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 5:06 AM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote: >> > 'clip-path' could still be used for referencing SVG 'clipPath' elements >> > or could shadow 'clip' and 'clip' supports a <FuncIRI> as well. >> >> We've finally stumbled on a decent way to handle aliasing - >> 'clip-path' can be treated as a shorthand for 'clip', and we can add >> url()/select() to 'clip' in addition to the shape functions. > > > We made clip-path induce a stacking context on the element. As usual, this > made implementation a lot easier. > > Making 'clip' handle arbitrary shapes, while not inducing a stacking > context, would be a real pain to implement (although we could do it). Making > 'clip' induce a stacking context would pose its own Web compatibility > hazard. > > If some browser vendors wants to do those Web compatibility experiments, > please go ahead. I'm a bit fatigued by break-the-Web experiments at the > moment :-). Aw, but you're so good at it! I'll see about trying some out. If they fail, perhaps we can do the opposite, and make 'clip' alias to 'clip-path', with the necessary behavior. I'm curious, though, why using arbitrary shapes without a stacking context is difficult, but using a rectangle is okay. ~TJ
Received on Monday, 20 August 2012 14:36:00 UTC