Not compatible with safari

[terwanerik]

Not compatible with safari

[terwanerik]

Ah alright i see, yeah the bindElement is used when you want to trigger classes inside a scrolling div.

For example (untested code);

<div class="wrap">
  <div data-scroll></div>
  <div data-scroll></div>
  <div data-scroll></div>
</div>

.wrap {
  height: 500px;
  overflow-y: scroll;
}

.wrap div[data-scroll] {
  height: 300px;
  width: 100%;
  background: red;
}

var wrapper = document.querySelector('.wrap');

/** 
  * First parameter = options
  * Second parameter = bindElement (where to fetch the [data-scroll] elements from)
  * Last parameter = the element to listen for `scroll` event, so the custom wrapper
  */
new ScrollTrigger({}, document.body, wrapper);

It then adds the scroll listener to the .wrap div, and checks the scrollTop from .wrap. In most cases you'd leave bindElement alone.

[terwanerik]

What version of safari are you using?

[nightire]

@terwanerik version 12. I should make it clear: in Safari, it has document.documentElement.scrollTop/Left property, however its value is always 0, this is what I mean of saying "not working".

[terwanerik]

Alright, the thing is; it checks if a bindElement is given, which standards to body. document.body.scrollTop/Left works perfectly in Safari, so that line should not be called on Safari. Is there a minimal, complete and verifiable example where it isn't working?

[nightire]

@terwanerik Alright, I think I know what's going on. I didn't write the original code, it was written by one of my colleagues. After read your comment, I checked the source code where ScrollTrigger has initialized, then I realized he use a specific node instead of window as the bindElement.

As a result, this node's scrollTop is always 0, so this clause will return document.documentElement.scrollTop which "not working" in Safari as I described at the beginning.

Now my question becomes: is it allowed to passing arbitrary element instead of window as bindElement?

P.S. I don't know why he did that, but I'd prefer to not change his original code first.

[nightire]

@terwanerik Ah, that makes sense now. Thank you!