- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 16:19:03 -0700
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 3:31 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > On 04/18/2013 12:20 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com> >> wrote: >>> If a table cell is promoted to an *actual* stacking context (by e.g. >>> setting "opacity: 0.9" on it), *then* the cell's background would be >>> part of the cell's stacking context, right? >> >> Maybe? It looks like that's what Chrome does. However, borders still >> belong to the table itself if they're collapsed. > > What, so you paint the table cell's background on top of its borders? > I think that's problematic. No, other way around: cell backgrounds are still painted underneath the borders. The table owns the borders, and it promotes its own borders to paint above its cells' contents. ~TJ
Received on Friday, 19 April 2013 23:19:50 UTC