.editor-styles-wrapper styles opacity changed

[killerbeez]

In WordPress 6.4.3, the block editor automatically applies this to .editor-styles-wrapper:

.editor-styles-wrapper.mce-content-body, .editor-styles-wrapper.editor-styles-wrapper {
    opacity: 1;
}

While testing WordPress 6.5, this no longer occurs. Our theme has opacity: 0 applied to the body, and we use jQuery to change it to opacity: 1 when the DOM is loaded. This means that in 6.5, our block editor has 0 opacity.

The issue for us is that this also applies to the block editor and as a result we see a grey box instead of the blocks of content.

In testing with WordPress Alpha 6.6 or with the latest Gutenberg activated this doesn't appear to be the case, is there a reason this was removed from the 6.5 core?

[jorbin]

Though the symptoms are different, I wonder if this may be a duplicate of #60614. Moving to 6.5 for visibility.

[youknowriad]

Hi there! would you be able to share the theme (or a small theme that we can reproduce this with). There are different rendering modes in the block editor that are triggered depending on the kind of themes we're talking about.

Things like the presence of meta boxes or third-party blocks in the editor can also change the way the editor is rendered. In some situations the editor is rendered within an iframe but in others no. Would you be able to check whether your site renders the editor canvas within an iframe or not.

[killerbeez]

Replying to youknowriad:

Hi there! would you be able to share the theme (or a small theme that we can reproduce this with). There are different rendering modes in the block editor that are triggered depending on the kind of themes we're talking about.

Things like the presence of meta boxes or third-party blocks in the editor can also change the way the editor is rendered. In some situations the editor is rendered within an iframe but in others no. Would you be able to check whether your site renders the editor canvas within an iframe or not.

Hi there, appreciate you and everyone looking into this, if possible, could we give you access to a fresh/clean build of our theme as it would be a little tricky to package into something installable without the entire site. If that idea suits, and you gave us an email etc, we could then create admin and ftp details to send.

[swissspidy]

Potential candidate for 6.5.1, but needs more information.

It would be great to share a minimum viable reproduction theme instead of sending emails or FTP credentials or whatever.

[killerbeez]

Replying to swissspidy:

Potential candidate for 6.5.1, but needs more information.

It would be great to share a minimum viable reproduction theme instead of sending emails or FTP credentials or whatever.

Ok, where should i email it?

[jorbin]

@killerbeez You can upload a zip to this ticket. It does not need to be the full theme, just the minimum required to demonstrate the issue.

[devsahadat]

@killerbeez Could you please upload the theme here? will be glad to have a look for the solution. Thank you

[davidbaumwald]

Milestone renamed

[grantmkin]

Hi @killerbeez ! Checking in: are you able to upload the theme (or a partial version) to this ticket that we can use to reproduce the issue?

[jorbin]

Due to lack of response, I think this may need to be closed. Also, moving this out of 6.5.3 since it won't make it in.

[karmatosed]

I would agree that closing this right now makes sense. Thank you, everyone, for your work on this and reporting. I will add that by closing we can always reconsider at a later date. I am closing with a state of 'worksforme' as no comments ever show replication directly of this issue and the theme used wasn't available.