- From: Konrad via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2018 07:52:22 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
This is nonsense. Is there any reliable explanation of why is this implemented the way it is beside assumptions? With the spread of CSS transforms `position: fixed` becomes completely unreliable and writing in any current spec or guide that `fixed` has anything to do with the viewport is simply misleading. What makes me go crazy is that it's an issue from 2012 or earlier and you still read about viewport e.g. in Mozilla Web Docs: > The element is removed from the normal document flow; no space is created for the element in the page layout. Instead, it is positioned relative to the screen's viewport and doesn't move when scrolled. Then later it's casually added that: > When an ancestor has the transform, perspective, or filter property set to something other than none, that ancestor is used as the container instead of the viewport As this breaks probably each reasonable use case for `fixed` I'd put much more emphasis on it and mark clearly `fixed` as half broken. -- GitHub Notification of comment by koko236 Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/913#issuecomment-381054630 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 13 April 2018 07:52:25 UTC