- From: jonjohnjohnson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 23:58:06 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Related... Though `@supports(position:sticky)` currently parses for all major vendors, Blink, which has the largest market share, still doesn't support *fully support the value. @SelenIT https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2155#issuecomment-410978077 > It seems that for some reason Chrome reverted their changes for fixing position:sticky behavior on `thead` element. @tabatkins I understand your sentiment about making things worse, but currently the often most efficient ways to deal with false `@support` scenarios are selector hacks, even if... @dbaron https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3051#issuecomment-416084354 > Using hacks that assume support for X is equivalent to support for Y is a bad idea if those hacks are targeting current browsers. Such hacks are safe only if the features are implemented in all current browsers and the equivalence holds in the old versions where they're not implemented. -- GitHub Notification of comment by jonjohnjohnson Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3559#issuecomment-459159797 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 30 January 2019 23:58:07 UTC