I am using inkscape 0.92, and I have multiple pairs of objects that I want to partially overlap sort of like the following:
The objects involved here are depicted as ABC and DEF. The objects may actually be either textual or graphical, but denoting them in this way makes it possible to easily and unambiguously refer to specific objects.
As is apparent, I have an outline on DEF, and want that outline to obscure ABC. In particular, however, I want the outline to still effectively be transparent in the result, and reveal portions of any objects which might be on the page but below ABC. Essentially, in this diagram, everything that is depicted as white in this picture should actually just be transparent, and reveal any objects below.
I know could simply achieve this look, if I already everything exactly in the right position and nothing else was ever going to change, is make a duplicate of DEF, add the outline to it, convert its stroke to path, and then use Path->Difference on ABC to cut that path out from ABC.
However, the problem I have with this solution is that it leaves neither the top or bottom objects in each pair as "live editable". While it properly obscures the object underneath, I need to able to do things like adjust the positions of either of the objects, or change their textual contents, or make tweaks to their boundaries when the object is simply a path, and have the outline of the upper objects still properly obscure the specific objects below.
If this were the entirety of the drawing, I would simply use a white outline on each object, but of course, this hides objects underneath "ABC" as well, and I want them to show through the otherwise "white" parts of this.
Thanks in advance.
After I posted this question I noticed that the stroke of an object covers also a part of the fill area of the object. I must add the following new requirement:
DEF in the wanted construction is strokeless, the generated gap should't wipe off anything from DEF.
That unfortunately reduces the usability of the first three answers. Sorry for poor question and hopefully someone can also solve this edited case.