- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 09:28:41 -0500
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: www-svg@w3.org
On 2/2/12 9:24 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > This is not hard, actually. The counter-* properties, for example, > actually just need to not affect any counters started outside the > display:none subtree. This means that a display:none subtree should > probably form an isolation boundary for counters, so counter-increment > can't affect a counter from outside. There is no such concept of isolation boundary in CSS right now, right? So it would need to be created and added. > I agree that changes are likely required, but they're fairly trivial. I don't think they will be trivial to spec, and they will be even less trivial to implement. And that wouldn't address the other issues with animations/transitions, or with other future things the CSSWG adds while thinking that there is an invariant that display:none things don't affect CSS rendering. At some point you may want to step back and think about how much complexity you really want to add to support what's fundamentally an edge case and whether a simpler solution in spec terms might be better. -Boris
Received on Thursday, 2 February 2012 14:29:08 UTC