On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Benoit Girard <bgirard@mozilla.com> wrote: > Alright I'd like to reach an consensus on how to best handle stacking > context issues since so far there doesn't seem to have one yet. > > Currently forcing a stack context for all usage of will-animate is better > for forward compatibility. For example 'will-animate: new-prop' would have > the same rendering for any browsers that supports it. It was said above > that forcing a stacking context isn't necessary to optimize the content by > layerizing under certain conditions. Not forcing a layer is handy for > authors where one wouldn't be otherwise required. > Forcing a stacking context doesn't force a layer, at least not in Gecko and not in other browsers either AFAIK. Ali brought up an example where forcing a stacking context is undesirable. There was some debate about it but it seemed plausible. Personally I think I can live with the list of values for which "will-change" induces a stacking context being fixed but extensible (matching the list of properties whose non-initial values induce a stacking context). There is a forward-compatibility issue but it's basically the same issue as new-prop:value appearing in a style sheet, which is going to happen at the same time. Rob -- Jtehsauts tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy Mdaon yhoaus eanuttehrotraiitny eovni le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o Whhei csha iids teoa stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d 'mYaonu,r "sGients uapr,e tfaokreg iyvoeunr, 'm aotr atnod sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t" uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n? gBoutt uIp waanndt wyeonut thoo mken.o w
Received on Tuesday, 10 December 2013 00:06:30 UTC