- From: Oriol Brufau via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 22:07:49 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Loirooriol has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts: == [css-position][quirks] Should `positon: sticky` avoid the percentage height calculation quirk? == https://quirks.spec.whatwg.org/#the-percentage-height-calculation-quirk > In [quirks mode](https://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-document-quirks), for the purpose of calculating the [height](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-sizing-3/#propdef-height) of an element element, if the [computed value](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-cascade-5/#computed-value) of the [position](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-position-3/#propdef-position) property of element is [relative](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-position-3/#valdef-position-relative) or [static](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-position-3/#valdef-position-static), [...] the [containing block](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-display-4/#containing-block) of element must be calculated using the following algorithm, aborting on the first step that returns a value: It only mentions `position: relative` or `static`, but I guess this was written before the introduction of `position: sticky`. Sticky positioning is pretty much identical to relative positioning, except for the interpretation of the inset properties. So if relative positioning has the quirk, I think sticky positioning should have it too. All 3 major browsers agree: `position: sticky` does not avoid the quirk. ```html <!-- quirks --> <div style="height: 50%; background: cyan; position: sticky">foo</div> ``` Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12422 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 30 June 2025 22:07:50 UTC