/* -------------------------------------------------- */
/* ACF section blocks                                   */
/* -------------------------------------------------- */

/* The theme's section blocks (inc/blocks.php) reuse the section markup the page
   templates emit, so they inherit that styling for free. Two things do not come
   for free, and both are handled here.

   Everything is scoped to .ld-block-section. The page templates decide their own
   backgrounds and are already correct; nothing below may reach them. */


/* -------------------------------------------------- */
/* 1. Full-bleed inside a post body                     */
/* -------------------------------------------------- */

/* A band in a post body is boxed in twice: .entry-content caps its children at
   780px, and the .section__content wrapping the whole post body caps everything
   at --max-width. "alignfull" only clears the first — the section still came out
   1200px wide and inset 93px, while the same block on a Standort (a direct child
   of <main>) ran edge to edge. Two bands of different widths for the same block
   is the bug.

   The negative margins are measured against the viewport because the 1200px
   ancestor is what has to be escaped, and nothing in the cascade knows how far
   off-centre that ancestor sits.

   Only the .section wrapper breaks out. .section__content inside it still
   centres on --max-width, so the text column lands exactly where it does on a
   Standort.

   .section--cta-banner is excluded on purpose. It is not a full-bleed band: it
   is a centred --max-width container holding a gradient card, and letting it
   break out stretched that card to 1352px where every other CTA on the site
   sits at 1152. */
.entry-content > .ld-block-section.alignfull:not(.section--cta-banner) {
	width: 100vw;
	max-width: 100vw;
	margin-left: calc(50% - 50vw);
	margin-right: calc(50% - 50vw);
}

/* 100vw counts the scrollbar; the layout viewport does not. On a desktop with
   classic (non-overlay) scrollbars the band therefore overhangs by the
   scrollbar's width and would add a horizontal scrollbar of its own.

   Clipped on .site-main rather than on body: the site header is position:sticky
   and lives outside <main>, so this cannot affect it. clip, not hidden — hidden
   would make this a scroll container and the waves' view() timelines resolve
   against the nearest one, which is the same trap 05-sections.css calls out. */
.site-main {
	overflow-x: clip;
}


/* -------------------------------------------------- */
/* 2. Spacing inside a post body                        */
/* -------------------------------------------------- */

/* Inside .entry-content a section is nested in .section--blog-inhalt and its
   7rem of padding, so its own 7rem stacks on top and leaves a chasm.

   Only plain sections are tightened. A section carrying the blend has a wave
   at each edge and 05-sections.css gives it `calc(4rem + var(--wave-height))`
   to clear them; overriding that with a flat 3rem pulls the heading up under
   the wave, which is exactly what it looked like. */
.entry-content > .ld-block-section:not(:has(> .section__bg-photo)) {
	padding-top: 4rem;
	padding-bottom: 4rem;
}

/* .entry-content > * gives every child a bottom margin for prose rhythm. On a
   band that is wrong twice over: the section already carries its own padding,
   and the margin opens a white stripe between two adjacent bands — exactly
   where the wave dividers are supposed to meet. */
.entry-content > .ld-block-section {
	margin-bottom: 0;
}

/* Prose after a band still needs its rhythm back. */
.entry-content > .ld-block-section + * {
	margin-top: 2rem;
}

.entry-content > .ld-block-section:first-child:not(:has(> .section__bg-photo)) {
	padding-top: 0;
}

.entry-content > .ld-block-section:last-child:not(:has(> .section__bg-photo)) {
	padding-bottom: 0;
}


/* -------------------------------------------------- */
/* 3. Type colour follows the background switch         */
/* -------------------------------------------------- */

/* Each section class was written for exactly one background, because until now
   a template chose it: .section--leistungen and .section--zahlen paint their
   headings white and their cards in dark glass for the gradient, while the FAQ
   and the Textabschnitt use dark ink for white. The "Farbverlauf-Hintergrund"
   switch makes that choice per block, so either can now end up on the wrong
   ground — white text on white, or ink on the gradient. These two blocks put
   the type back on whichever side the switch landed. */

/* On the gradient: everything inverts. */
.ld-block-section:has(> .section__bg-photo) :is(h2, h3, h4, p, dt, dd, li, .section__subheading) {
	color: #fff;
}

/* The FAQ rules are the one place a rule colour also has to change: hairlines
   tuned for white are invisible on the blend. */
.ld-block-section:has(> .section__bg-photo) .standort-faq__item {
	border-top-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.35);
}

.ld-block-section:has(> .section__bg-photo) .standort-faq__item:last-child {
	border-bottom-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.35);
}

/* On white: back to ink, and the glass cards become real cards. --glass-dark-bg
   is a dark tint meant to sit over a photograph; on white it just reads as a
   grey box, and the white card text inside it disappears. Same recipe as
   .referenz-card, which has always sat on white.

   .zahl-card, .zahlen__intro and .plattform-card aren't listed any more:
   they're an opaque white card and plain dark text unconditionally now
   (13-zahlen.css / 28-plattform.css, same move as .leistung-card), so this
   correction has nothing left to do for them — each picks up its own
   hairline border there instead. */
.ld-block-section:not(:has(> .section__bg-photo)) :is(h2, h3, h4, p, dt, dd, li, .section__subheading) {
	color: var(--color-ink);
}

/* The icon tile keeps its fill, so its glyph stays white either way. */
.ld-block-section:not(:has(> .section__bg-photo)) .icon-tile {
	color: #fff;
}

/* Exception: the Leistungen cards. Their surface is white regardless of the
   section behind them (07-leistungen.css), so on the gradient band the
   "invert everything" rule above would put white type on a white card. Pull
   it back to ink here. On a white section the card's own ink already matches
   the general rule above, so no exception is needed there. */
.ld-block-section:has(> .section__bg-photo) .leistung-card :is(h3, li) {
	color: var(--card-ink);
}

.ld-block-section:has(> .section__bg-photo) .leistung-card p {
	color: var(--card-body);
}

/* Same exception, same reason: .plattform-card is white regardless of the
   section behind it (28-plattform.css). .plattform-card--cta is the one
   card in this grid that isn't — it carries the brand gradient and its own
   white-text rule further down, which has to win the specificity tie this
   creates; it does, purely because 28-plattform.css loads after this file
   (see letsdoo_style_parts() in functions.php), not because it's written
   any more specifically here. */
.ld-block-section:has(> .section__bg-photo) .plattform-card :is(h3, li) {
	color: var(--card-ink);
}

/* Exceptions: boxes that bring their own colour and so ignore the switch
   entirely. The CTA card paints a gradient on an otherwise plain section, so
   the "on white" rule above would have turned its heading black on pink.

   It has to repeat that rule's `:not(:has(…))` to outweigh it. :is() takes the
   highest specificity among its arguments, and that list contains
   .section__subheading — a class — so the rule above scores (0,3,0), not the
   (0,2,1) an all-element list would suggest. Dropping the :not() here makes
   this (0,2,1) and it silently loses. */
.ld-block-section:not(:has(> .section__bg-photo)) .cta-banner :is(h2, h3, p, li) {
	color: #fff;
}