On Fri, 1 Jun 2012, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com> wrote: > >> 4. "layer" and "layer 10" in section 6.1 are unclear. "Layer" is used > >> nowhere in CSS references used in this spec. This must be > >> clarified. > > > > This section also seems to assume that the list in CSS 2.1's appendix > > E is for the entire document (e.g. saying "Each browsing context has > > one associated viewport and therefore also one top layer"), but it's > > actually the painting order of a stacking context, of which there can > > be several. > > Tab, Ian, Robert, so the problem is that even if we create a new > stacking context layer, it will still be relative. > > R is root. R1 and R2 are its children, both creating their own stacking > context. R1 has z-index 0 and R2 has z-index 1. Now R1 has a child F. F > gets displayed fullscreen in the new "top layer", but will still be > behind R2. So we need something else. > > I'm not entirely sure what would be a good solution though. I assumed we were talking about the stacking context of the root element, not just the one that the <dialog>'s parent is in. Otherwise there wouldn't need to be anything about how the parent's stacking context has no effect, etc. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 1 June 2012 15:48:43 UTC