Skip to main content

Bug Tracker

Side navigation

#11188 closed bug (wontfix)

Opened January 18, 2012 03:09PM UTC

Closed March 05, 2012 05:28PM UTC

Last modified December 28, 2012 07:24AM UTC

Problem with .animate() for opacity in IE8

Reported by: San4es Owned by:
Priority: low Milestone: None
Component: css Version: 1.7
Keywords: ie8 Cc:
Blocked by: Blocking:

If I use .animate({ opacity: 0.32 }), nothing happens in IE8, but there is no such problem in other browsers (Chrome, Safari, Firefox, Opera, IE7, IE9).

There is example:

Attachments (0)
Change History (5)

Changed February 08, 2012 11:31AM UTC by sindresorhus comment:1

Simplified testcase

Looks like the problem occurs without jQuery too, so it's definitely not a jQuery bug. IE8 opacity filter does not want to apply to child elements with position set. I you add "filter: inherit" on the child CSS, the filter applies.

A fix would be to set "filter: inherit" on all descendants that has position set, but that would probably be an massive performance bottleneck. If there are no other solutions for this, I think we should just document it somewhere.

Changed March 05, 2012 05:28PM UTC by addyosmani comment:2

component: unfiledcss
keywords: → needsdocs
priority: undecidedlow
resolution: → wontfix
status: newclosed

So..granted that this isn't directly a jQuery bug, I think Sindre is right in that the most we should probably consider doing is documenting this. We *could* normalize the behaviour so that it behaves as expected in the test case above, but I'm tempted to second the notion that filter:inherit could be a perf issue. Unless someone feels strongly that this should be fixed, closing.

Changed March 05, 2012 06:40PM UTC by dmethvin comment:3

keywords: needsdocsie8 needsdocs

Changed August 16, 2012 02:47PM UTC by dmethvin comment:4

keywords: ie8 needsdocsie8

The first page of Google search is full of solutions on this, and it's a pretty specific edge case. I'll let Google handle it.

Changed December 28, 2012 07:24AM UTC by mikesherov comment:5

#9349 is a duplicate of this ticket.