W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2016

Re: [css-overflow][css-scroll-snap][css-position] position: fixed and paging

From: Chris Rebert <csswg@chrisrebert.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 19:22:29 -0800
Message-Id: <1455852149.3981008.525600146.5522AFFE@webmail.messagingengine.com>
To: www-style@w3.org
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016, at 05:23 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:14 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
> wrote:
> > One major problem with "position: fixed" elements is that the content
> > underneath
> > it is viewed as "scrolled into view" when in many cases it is in fact
> > invisible
> > to the viewer. This interferes with paging actions, which no longer page by
> > screenful of visible content (which is the only really useful behavior).
> >
> > Testcase:
> > http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?saved=3875 [1]
> >
> I don't think we should do anything about this.  Using position:fixed
> to position a header or something is bad practice; there are much
> better ways to do it now (like Flexbox).  There are many *other*
> use-cases for position:fixed that don't cause these problems and
> shouldn't reduce scrollable area, like a dialog floating on the page.

Pardon my lack of imagination, but how does Flexbox address this? I can
see how e.g. vh and calc() address this, but it's not obvious to me what
alternative Flexbox makes possible.

Also, if position:fixed has been deprecated for headers, I don't think
anyone gave web developers the memo. It's still used for headers on some
major sites (e.g. Twitter, YouTube) and many less-major sites.

Browser 🐛 of the day: http://crbug.com/534750
Received on Friday, 19 February 2016 03:22:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:57 UTC