- From: Jonathan Rimmer <jon.rimmer@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:26:28 +0100
- To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <543B9AC4.7020004@gmail.com>
I was looking as some polyfills for position: sticky, and I noticed one of the newest[1] recently backed out support for sticky table elements with the explanation that " Spec says table cells are not eligible for position: sticky"[2]. That didn't seem right, but the spec text does read as follows: " The effect of 'position: sticky' on table elements is the same as for 'position: relative'"[3] Now, I can't believe this is intended to mean that sticky positioning should replicate the behaviour of relative positioning when applied to table elements. I presume it's referring the applicability of sticky behaviour on the different table elements matching that of relative positioning, e.g. rows and cells can be stuck, but columns can't. But I can see why people would read it the other way. If sticky positioning *is* intended to work for table elements, could the spec text be updated to make that clear? Or at least, could I get a confirmation on this list from the editors that that is the intention, which I can point the author of the polyfill to? If sticky positioning *isn't" intended to work for table elements, well... I shouldn't need to point out how utterly *insane* that would be. But I can't believe that is the case. [1] https://github.com/wilddeer/stickyfill [2] https://github.com/wilddeer/stickyfill/releases/tag/1.1 [3] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-position/#position-property Thanks, Jon
Received on Monday, 13 October 2014 09:26:57 UTC