Re: [css4-images] element() and non-static children

On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk
<news@terrainformatica.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk
>> <news@terrainformatica.com> wrote:
>>> What is the z-index value of such element then?
>>> Let's assume that element used in element() (let it be A element) is in
>>> some container that has z-index:10 and the A element has children:
>>> B with z-index:1 and C with z-index:20. What would be the rendering
>>> order of this setup:
>>> 1. B -> A -> C or
>>> 2. A -> B -> C ?
>>> (note that element A is position:static by itself)
>>
>> I don't understand the question.  You just draw it like normal.  The
>> spec is very clear about how this works.
>
> It's my turn then to ask: what "draw it like normal" means in this
> case?
>
> Is your "normal" close to this:
>
> For the purpose of element() rendering take rendering tree of the
> whole document and render it in its normal order but skip all elements
> that are not the element itself or are not its descendants (DOM).
>
> ?
>
> This definition will cover positioned children with negative and positive
> z-indexes.
>
> This statement here [1] :
>
> "The image is constructed by rendering the referenced element and its
> descendants"
>
> can be read as render the element and *then* its descendants.
> Usually "render element" includes rendering of its content, that's why
> my question.

I'm not sure how this is ambiguous.  It means exactly what it says,
not anything weird or different.  If I meant anything other than
"render as normal", I would have said so.  Just... draw the element
and its descendants in the normal way, following Appendix E, over an
infinite transparent canvas.

~TJ

Received on Sunday, 29 July 2012 21:59:10 UTC