- From: Rick Byers <rbyers@chromium.org>
- Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 08:47:30 -0400
- To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Cc: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Received on Thursday, 9 April 2015 12:48:21 UTC
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote: > On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 13:14:27 +0200, Robert O'Callahan < > robert@ocallahan.org> wrote: > > In most ways, the root element acts as the viewport element. So I think >> scrollingElement would make more sense here. >> > > OK. I'm fine with either name. Anyone else have opinions about the name? > If not I'll change to scrollingElement. > I prefer scrollingElement as well (could use 'viewportScrollingElement' to be pedantic, but that seems overly long). Thanks! Do you think the spec text for scrollTop/Left/Width/Height could now be simplified by referring to the scrollingElement (rather than repeating the rules for each API)? That's probably how I'll implement it in blink. * overflow/background use body->viewport if html has the initial values. > Using either root or body works in any mode. > > * direction/writing-mode uses body->viewport (mostly, in implementations, > but this is an open issue). Since they inherit, using either root or body > works in any mode. > > > -- > Simon Pieters > Opera Software >
Received on Thursday, 9 April 2015 12:48:21 UTC