W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2015

Re: [css-overflow] interaction between "overflow-x" and "overflow-y", when one of them is "clip"

From: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 11:45:29 -0700
To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <5596D849.3070108@mozilla.com>
Thanks for the response!

On 07/03/2015 09:20 AM, Florian Rivoal wrote:
> maybe we can turn it around, and say that
> contain:paint should turn visible into auto, not clip. That
> would do the same as clip if the content does not overflow,
> but would require authors to be explicit about dropping content
> if that's what they want.
[...]
> Bottom line, my suggestion is to:
[...]
> - change overflow:visible + contain:paint to compute into
>   overflow:auto + contain:paint

So you're proposing that "contain:paint", on its own, would just end up
producing "overflow:auto"?

I don't think that matches the intent of "contain:paint"... the point is
to "contain painting", i.e. to clip.

And RE your concern about requiring authors to be explicit about
dropping content -- they *are* being explicit if they're using "contain:
paint". That is the author *explicitly asking* to drop any painting that
falls outside of the element's bounds.

~Daniel
Received on Friday, 3 July 2015 18:46:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:52:18 UTC