W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2013

Re: position fixed, z-index and Google Chrome.

From: Garrett Smith <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 13:21:01 -0800
Message-ID: <CABZUbM1m2CqcSfrMaoF+nhC5Buyxw4LGOisu0h+RAxPxvp9mbw@mail.gmail.com>
To: lists@m8y.org
Cc: www-style@w3.org
On 2/5/13, lists@m8y.org <lists@m8y.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Feb 2013, Simon Fraser wrote:
>> On Feb 5, 2013, at 10:48 AM, lists@m8y.org wrote:
>>> On Tue, 5 Feb 2013, Simon Fraser wrote:
>>>> On Feb 5, 2013, at 9:04 AM, lists@m8y.org wrote:
>>>>> So.  http://m8y.org/tmp/chrome_wtf.xhtml
>>>>> Is a mockup of a problem I encountered recently.
>>>>> I was told to bring this up here.
>>>>> How does Chrome expect us to workaround this behaviour?  Or are we just
>>>>> not supposed to implement layouts like this anymore?
>>>> What is the exact problem that you're seeing? How does Chrome's behavior
>>>> differ from other browsers?
>>> Appears to be related to:
>>> http://updates.html5rocks.com/2012/09/Stacking-Changes-Coming-to-position-fixed-elements
>>> The page has instructions to reproduce on it, did you try them? I can
>>> take screenshots if that helps.
>> Indeed. WebKit creates stacking context for position:fixed, in order to
>> optimize scrolling. This is not strictly compatible with the spec, but was
>> thought to have minimal real-world impact.
> Real world is a relative thing I guess.  When IE controlled the web, one
> could say IE6 not supporting position:fixed at all had little real-world
> impact 'cause we had no choice.  Certainly, I don't see a way to do the
> layout on that page anymore.

IE6 not supporting position:fixed was a common complaint among web
developers. The common workarounds came long before then, and included
using javascript to update those elements' positions.
Twitter: @xkit
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2013 21:21:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:08 UTC