Emilio, thanks for all your work on this!
On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 8:23 AM Emilio Cobos Álvarez wrote:
> Does anyone have strong opinions against removing scroll anchoring from
> Gecko, based on the above?
My 2c: it would be unfortunate to give up on scroll anchoring as a
feature altogether.
How
This has now landed. I've also filed
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1584283 to do something
similar with xul:wizard.
Brian
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 3:04 PM Brian Grinstead
wrote:
> I've put up a patch showing what would change at
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15833
Starting today (on autoland,coming to m-c soon), there is no more
[PrimaryGlobal] extended attribute on interfaces in our Web IDL, and
therefore all interfaces need an explicit [Exposed] annotation saying
where they are exposed (e.g. [Exposed=Window] for the case that used to
not have any annot
On Friday 2019-09-27 14:23 +0200, Emilio Cobos Álvarez wrote:
> Does anyone have strong opinions against removing scroll anchoring from
> Gecko, based on the above?
It seems pretty sad, since I think it's a very useful feature for a
large class of pages -- particularly pages that are more "documen
The W3C is proposing a revised charter for:
Accessibility Guidelines Working Group
https://www.w3.org/2019/08/draft-ag-charter
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2019Sep/0006.html
The differences from the previous charter are:
https://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https%3A
Hi Steve,
On 9/27/19 4:03 PM, Steve Kobes wrote:
Hi Emilio,
My recollection is that scroll anchoring was, in fact, a mess. I do not
personally have any opinion about whether scroll anchoring should be
removed from Gecko.
We (Chrome) decided to accept some compat issues for the sake of
lau
On 9/27/19 3:30 PM, twisniew...@mozilla.com wrote:
I suspect that if we can give our compat addon an easy way to specify sites
which need an opt-out, that might ease the pain. Likewise, as obnoxious as the
thought is, perhaps giving sites a standard way to opt out of anchoring could
be a reaso
My gut tells me that there would be fallout with users. I've been personally
told by more than one user that they are unwilling to use browsers without it,
as they feel like user-unfriendly relics.
As such I would recommend not removing it unless Blink does. I suspect that if
we can handle the
On 9/27/19 3:02 PM, Kenji Baheux wrote:
Are these compat issues specific to Firefox, or do they also trigger
weird behaviors on Chrome? Do you have a sense of the size and
convergence for the problematic cases?
Some of the ones we've seen reported are specific to Firefox in the
sense that the
Hi,
I was the one who originally implemented scroll anchoring in Firefox and just
want to say that I agree with Emilio here.
Scroll anchoring is a cool feature and would be great to have, but these
difficulties that Emilio has mentioned have been here since day-1.
It would be great to find a pat
And, to be clear, we _can_ fix these compat issues, some way or another.
One thought is to limit the amount of scroll adjustments without user
scrolling or stuff like that, which would prevent the "you get stuck on
the page".
Making anchoring opt-in rather than opt-out is another option, but
Hi,
(cc'ing webkit-dev@ and blink-dev@ in case they have feedback or
opinions, as WebKit is the only engine which does not implement scroll
anchoring, though I don't know if they plan to, and Blink is the only
other engine that does implement it. Please reply to dev-platform@ though.)
TLDR:
12 matches
Mail list logo
