W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2014

Re: [css-transforms] Should transform-style: preserve-3d create containing block for positioned descendants?

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 11:24:54 +1300
Message-ID: <CAOp6jLYJN6byST3YeW=74AgJ=x83oaEQuc=PpyRKA2ZjJNMttg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote:

> There is disagreement among implementations about whether
> "transform-style: preserve-3d” creates containing block for positions
> descendants.
> The working draft[1] says in the prose:
> A 3D rendering context is established by a a transformable element whose
> computed value for transform-style is preserve-3d, and which itself is not
> part of a 3D rendering context. Note that such an element is always a
> containing block.
> but we don't explicitly call this out under the transform-style property.
> The new spec text doesn't require that preserve-3d create containing block,
> and logically I see no reason why it should. (I’m also not sure why
> perspective has to create a containing block.)
> WebKit/Blink have this behavior because of a bug[2]. Firefox has this
> behavior too, possibly because they copied WebKit behavior, or went by the
> spec prose. IE 11 does not have this behavior.

I think it's simpler if it does. If we don't make it a containing block,
then abs-pos children can escape from a preserve-3d parent and it's unclear
whether and how the parent's preserve-3d would apply to them.

oIo otoeololo oyooouo otohoaoto oaonoyooonoeo owohooo oioso oaonogoroyo
owoiotoho oao oboroootohoeoro oooro osoiosotoeoro owoiololo oboeo
osouobojoeocoto otooo ojouodogomoeonoto.o oAogoaoiono,o oaonoyooonoeo
osoaoyoso otooo oao oboroootohoeoro oooro osoiosotoeoro,o o‘oRoaocoao,o’o
oaonosowoeoroaoboloeo otooo otohoeo ocooouoroto.o oAonodo oaonoyooonoeo
osoaoyoso,o o‘oYooouo ofooooolo!o’o owoiololo oboeo oiono odoaonogoeoro
otohoeo ofoioroeo ooofo ohoeololo.
Received on Thursday, 11 December 2014 22:25:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:49 UTC