W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2013

Re: :stuck psuedo class WAS: specifying position:sticky

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 15:57:51 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBAxJmm5svWrzFO3GieU7eDvhL2O7N8=4Xn2wZQpc11cg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>
Cc: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>, Corey Ford <cford@mozilla.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 8:04 AM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote:
>> The problem is that it defeats one of the main optimizations which drove
>> our creation of a declarative sticky behavior, which is that we want to be
>> able to delegate the implementation of the sticky behavior to another
>> thread, the thread on which scrolling happens (keeping it off the main
>> thread means that scrolling can remain responsive even when the main thread
>> is busy doing layout/painting). If we have to do layout when an element
>> enters or leaves the sticky state, then we’ll have to do that back on the
>> main thread, which would result in a scrolling stutter.
> You could make the "stuck" state apply lazily, so scrolling wouldn't stutter
> but a shadow (for example) would not appear or disappear immediately.

Similar to :hover, then?

Received on Wednesday, 28 August 2013 22:58:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:33 UTC