Re: [css-containment] ED of Containment ready for review (was overflow:clip)

On Nov 8, 2013, at 2:33 pm, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> The ED for the 'contain' property is now ready for review and possible
> WD publication: <http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-containment/>.
> 
> This is the property that originated as my suggestion for "overflow:
> clip", for stronger layout isolation.  As discussed on this list, it
> grew a bit to encompass more than just overflowing, so that using the
> property actually isolates the element's subtree *completely*
> 
> Please review and let me know if I missed anything, or if there's
> anything that's not sane there.
> 
> If you have good suggestions for how to split the containment up into
> a few pieces, and good justification for why you'd want this
> (preferably pointing to something real-world that could benefit from
> being isolated but needs to violate some of the assumptions of strict
> containment), we can make the property alternately accept a few
> feature keywords that turn on isolation per-feature.
> 
> I'm aiming for a WD request in the next week or so, so review soon is
> appreciated!

It’s unclear to me if “contain: strict” is a hint from the web author to the UA
to say that the set of conditions given in the spec are true, or whether
it actually causes all those conditions to be enforced.

I suspect that it’s the former, but does this allow the UA to just render
incorrectly if the author says “contain: strict” but the conditions are not met?
That’s pretty weaksauce.

Simon

Received on Saturday, 9 November 2013 00:04:10 UTC