OK, that's fine information, that IE6 and 7 wouldn't have smooth opacity animation in my use case. I didn't know that.
But IE 8 and 9, and every other modern browser on the planet, WOULD have smooth opacity animation in this case, right? I mean, *I* frankly don't care that much that IE6 and 7 would be slightly less graceful, if everyone else could benefit from the more smooth opacity animation.
And isn't this a perfect use-case argument for "progressive enhancement" (or "graceful degradation")? By definition, we have a case here where very old browsers can't get the smooth animation, but can at least get the full-stop hiding (the most important part), and *all other modern (or even remotely modern) browsers* can get a more "enhanced" experience with the animation of the opacity.
I recognize that I could write my own animation easily. I could also hack my copy of the jquery source code to make
hide(XX) do the more sensible thing. That's not really the point of this ticket.
The point of this ticket is that there's a case where a more sensible thing could (fairly easily) be done with
hide(XX), for all modern browsers (and would only fail to be sensible in really old browsers like IE6 and 7). But even in that "failure case", the important part, the hiding, would still work just fine.
So I don't see the downside in this being an example of progressive enhancement baked into jQuery, to make
hide(XX) more sensible, other than maybe a half-dozen extra lines of code at the most?