- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 14:31:53 -0400
- To: Chris Rebert <csswg@chrisrebert.com>, www-style@w3.org
On 02/18/2016 10:22 PM, Chris Rebert wrote: > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016, at 05:23 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:14 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> >> wrote: >>> One major problem with "position: fixed" elements is that the content >>> underneath >>> it is viewed as "scrolled into view" when in many cases it is in fact >>> invisible >>> to the viewer. This interferes with paging actions, which no longer page by >>> screenful of visible content (which is the only really useful behavior). >>> >>> Testcase: >>> http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?saved=3875 [1] >>> > <snip> >> >> I don't think we should do anything about this. Using position:fixed >> to position a header or something is bad practice; there are much >> better ways to do it now (like Flexbox). There are many *other* >> use-cases for position:fixed that don't cause these problems and >> shouldn't reduce scrollable area, like a dialog floating on the page. > > Pardon my lack of imagination, but how does Flexbox address this? I can > see how e.g. vh and calc() address this, but it's not obvious to me what > alternative Flexbox makes possible. > > Also, if position:fixed has been deprecated for headers, I don't think > anyone gave web developers the memo. It's still used for headers on some > major sites (e.g. Twitter, YouTube) and many less-major sites. To follow up, the CSSWG resolved to rename scroll-snap-padding to scroll-padding and extend its use so that it can solve these issues. Further discussion in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/395 ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 26 September 2016 18:32:24 UTC