- From: Craig Kovatch via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2018 10:08:42 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
@upsuper @tantek I disagree that #3079 addressed any issues raised here. Please reopen this. The "reasoning" section is mostly subjective without sourcing or data. > The WebKit implementation of pseudo-elements for scrollbar is considered to be a feature mistakenly exposed to the web. Considered by whom? Why is it considered a mistake? > Operating systems continuously evolve their scrollbar designs to provide better user experience, beyond the ability of any set of pseudo-elements to accurately model this over time. I'm not sure this is relevant even if it's true -- and I'm not convinced it's true, either. The visual styling of OSes has changed slightly, but besides auto-hiding the UX has not changed at all since the first release of OSX. Windows, similarly, restyled their scrollbars, but what of the UX has changed? > Different platforms have different scrollbar structure means testing interop is harder, because authors would need to take not only engine but also platforms into account. Testing for whom? What does "testing interop" here mean? Interop (as I understand it) is a much lower layer of software than a web author would ever consider. Chrome and Safari both have a consistent and stable experience across OSes. Why is this any harder than any "reskinning" any other native behavior? -- GitHub Notification of comment by craigkovatch Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2009#issuecomment-421549017 using your GitHub account
Received on Saturday, 15 September 2018 10:08:43 UTC