4 ms·
Are summary-details ok to use yet? Last time I've checked, ammittedly some time ago, browsers had bugs and quirks around them.
by alserio 4y ago
Are summary-details ok to use yet? Last time I've checked, ammittedly some time ago, browsers had bugs and quirks around them.
- its-summertime 4y agoany issues should be easily enough to polyfill
- alserio 4y agoCss rendering issues weren't
- chrismorgan 4y ago• IE and EdgeHTML never supported <details>, so until comparatively recently you had to polyfill it. Now, you need not worry about this, because you should actively not support IE or old Edge. • WebKit still doesn’t use ::marker on summary. If you’re hiding the disclosure marker, you can’t just use `summary { display: block }` or `summary::marker { display: none; }`, and must remember to `::-webkit-details-marker { display: none }` as well. And if you want to change it, you can’t just change its list-style-type or manipulate ::marker, but must clobber the whole thing and use ::before or similar. (Aside: if you don’t use a Mac, Epiphany is a good WebKit-based alternative to Safari on other platforms that will exhibit most of the same behaviours and quirks as Safari.) Other than that, it’s all pretty solid now.
- alserio 4y agoThank you!
- spookie 4y agoMay I also recommend Falkon, as an Epiphany alternative! Really hoping the best for both projects!
- chrismorgan 4y agoFalkon uses QtWebEngine, which uses Chromium. That’s no use as a Safari testing alternative.
- spookie 4y agoYou're right. Since it's a KDE project I assumed they would be more aligned to WebKit's roots, sad.