Xianzhu Wang
Xianzhu Wang
Chrome has changed to conform to the current spec. Since the change, people have filed bugs (e.g. https://crbug.com/1322942) about the case.
I think the outer edge of a rounded outline should follow the same rule as box-shadow spread. Filed https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7378.
How about defining visual representation as: visible ink overflow [1]? - It excludes invisible things - (unrelated to this bug, but is a (good?) side-effect of using visible ink overflow)...
No, I'm not suggesting reporting layout shift for outline and shadow changes, but suggesting considering ink overflow when the object shifts. Please see the examples: example 1 shows what we...
I found I misunderstood the "box" concept. The "principle box" is defined as to contain its descendant boxes and generated content. Then the spec is precise about ancestors and descendants.
Note that currently Chromium doesn't conform to the spec about visible overflows from descendants.
I'm reopening this issue because there is still things to be clarified. ``` ``` When the parent moves, currently Chrome reports 1000x1000 area is moved, but the real covered area...
I think 1 second is worth trying.