- From: Viatcheslav Ostapenko <sl.ostapenko@samsung.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 23:59:47 -0400
- To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Cc: "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>, Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, 2014-03-18 at 16:35 -0700, Brad Kemper wrote: > On Mar 18, 2014, at 12:37 PM, Viatcheslav Ostapenko <sl.ostapenko@samsung.com> wrote: > > > > Let's say this way: > > Implementation of sticky positioning for table columns would bring extra > > complexity, but it will be rarely used. > > Why assume if would be rare? Headings on the left or right side of tables are not that rare. > > When designing for mobile, having a non-scrolling row header column could be pretty useful. > Or having a column of action-oriented icons or checkboxes that hugs the right side as you scroll the rows to the right to see the other columns. Yes. That's was my original thought, but I cannot remember many websites that use such design. > By the way, it isn't just sticky positioning that is discriminating against columns but not rows. It is other positioning in the draft too. At least for webkit/blink table column handing is very different from other table elements. > > Taking into account that there > > is simple workaround I don't think it's worth the trouble. > > You could say the same thing about table rows. I don't think we should sacrifice useful consistency just because it requires a little extra effort. For table rows we've got it almost for free, but it's not the case with table columns. Slava
Received on Wednesday, 19 March 2014 04:00:20 UTC