- From: SelenIT via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2018 17:19:39 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Please refer to the [current Editor's draft of the spec](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-position-3/#sticky-pos) since the published version you referred to may be rather outdated. AFAIK, the spec doesn't say that either relative or sticky position _should_ not work for table internal elements. On the contrary, it [specifies their behavior for relative positioning](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-position-3/#valdef-position-relative), and implies that sticky positioning for them should behave similarly (i.e. only for table columns and column groups the positioning should be ignored, other table parts should be offset relatively to their normal position in the table, and cells spanning several rows/columns should be shifted as a whole). So non-supporting either [relative](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1899) or sticky positioning for table parts is just a bug of the browsers. It is already marked as fixed for [Chrome 65](https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=702927) and [Firefox 59](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=975644). -- GitHub Notification of comment by SelenIT Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2155#issuecomment-354820196 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 2 January 2018 17:19:44 UTC