This is a severe limitation, even though it is known!!!
We use tables a lot, and since the introduction of page layouts, I've replaced in our global page models all Section and Column macros with page layouts. Page layouts are a lot more intuitive, so my feeling was that page layouts would outlast Section and Column macros.
As a workaround, we're already using the Table Enhancer macro. However, it has its disadvantages in Edit mode, such as the cursor jumping to the top of the page when you try to select text, etc. For that reason, I would have expected to replace it with the built-in native table functions - that is, should they work within a page layout.
So, if I want sticky headers, the choice I have is: either I use Section/Column macros, or I use the tableenhancer macro within a page layout.
Those choices are clear to me as a Confluence admin, but it just contributes to make things a little more confusing – and less visually intuitive – for our end-users. Which is rarely what you aim when using a tool that proudly states its ease of use.
I can't believe this has been tagged as a "Won't do"...
I feel this is a big gap. How can freezing the header row not be standard and work all the time without tricks or addons?
@Atlassian... I am a big proponent of your tools, but it is this type of stuff that upsets many users. It is this stuff that is heard at the EC level, not always the good about your tools.
Best,
David