- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2016 15:18:43 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
When you get down to primitives, plenty of things aren't convenient anymore; you often have to reinvent bits that you've lost along the way. The reason I'm arguing that this isn't a "primitive" is because it gets rid of *some* of the methods for users to scroll the box, but not all of them. It's halfway down the stack. But arguing over which is more primitive isn't a fruitful exercise; if we can agree, great, but if we can't, belaboring the point doesn't get us anywhere (we're just slicing things differently). I'm still stuck on the fundamental usability issue I raised earlier - when you remove scrollbars, how are people supposed to scroll on devices without panning functionality? This is why I've been pushing back against this - it looks *very* easy for this to be very user-hostile when naively used on "mobile-first" designs without being usability-tested on desktops (particularly ones without a mousewheel, which at least allows vertical "panning"). `hidden` at least has the benefit that *no one* can scroll it without scripting or navigation, so it's more obviously necessary to provide user affordances, and those manually-added affordances are more likely to be tested, leading to people being more likely to remember how desktops work. Thus my earlier suggestion of having the value only hide scrollbars on devices where the UA knows that panning is a primary scrolling mechanism - phones and tablets, maybe *some* touch-focused laptops. Then maybe we can also have a less-conveniently-named value that actually turns off scrollbars all the time, which makes it clearer what the author's responsibilities are. -- GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/419#issuecomment-252280587 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 7 October 2016 15:18:49 UTC