- From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
- Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:56:32 +0100
- To: www-style@w3.org
- CC: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Le 19/06/2013 11:22, Simon Sapin a écrit : > Le 19/06/2013 11:17, Simon Sapin a écrit : >>> 1. Both the positioning and painting area are based on the scrolled >>> content. (The difference between padding-box and border-box includes any >>> non-overlay scrollbars in addition to borders.) >> This is the part I find more important. In particular, the portion of >> the image that is clipped by 'background-clip: content-box' compared to >> 'padding-box' can scroll out of view >> >> As an example, these two document should behave roughly the same when >> scrolling: >> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2013Jun/att-0075/background-attachment-local-painting-area-test.html >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2013Jun/att-0075/background-attachment-local-painting-area-ref.html > > Here is the behavior that the first document should *not* have: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2013Jun/att-0076/painting-area-notref.html Blink and WebKit have the behavior I want (-ref.html), Perso and Trident the one I don’t. (-notref.html) I’m in the middle of writing the Gecko implementation, and will match Blink/WebKit. -- Simon Sapin
Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2013 17:56:57 UTC