CARVIEW |
Select Language
HTTP/2 200
date: Fri, 10 Oct 2025 03:25:32 GMT
content-type: text/html
content-encoding: gzip
last-modified: Sat, 15 Jul 2023 03:16:32 GMT
cache-control: max-age=2592000, public
expires: Sun, 09 Nov 2025 03:25:31 GMT
vary: Accept-Encoding
access-control-allow-origin: *
x-request-id: 98c302cd8955f473
strict-transport-security: max-age=15552015; preload
x-frame-options: deny
x-xss-protection: 1; mode=block
cf-cache-status: EXPIRED
set-cookie: __cf_bm=P4xQuLWf10l5esjzkOCLnXT5fWGvzI6gXuazyJuP1Ls-1760066732-1.0.1.1-ITxm9YAt4_U20ioOKt4W_xTWCqCnPiA4MsKDJJQehPMaKGh7DUjC8ntuF7eeiasgstMCNQnX6mrWTZrZ.CEYXbjmlrv2tC3TZmJMIIBKtps; path=/; expires=Fri, 10-Oct-25 03:55:32 GMT; domain=.w3.org; HttpOnly; Secure; SameSite=None
server: cloudflare
cf-ray: 98c302cd8955f473-BLR
alt-svc: h3=":443"; ma=86400
[css3-flexbox][css-ALL] Should z-index Just Work on flex items? from fantasai on 2012-07-09 (www-style@w3.org from July 2012)
[css3-flexbox][css-ALL] Should z-index Just Work on flex items?
- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 00:24:03 -0700
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <4FFA8713.6040105@inkedblade.net>
I think, and I suspect others agree, that the fact that z-index doesn't Just Work without 'position: relative' was a mistake in the design of CSS2. There's already a distinction between 'z-index: auto' and 'z-index: 0' that can easily distinguish a stacking context at the default level vs. a non-stacking-context at default level. The question I have is, going forward, do we want new CSS layout modes to let z-index do its job whenever it's non-'auto', without requiring 'position: relative'? (If so, we should start with making it work in flexbox.) ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 9 July 2012 07:24:30 UTC