Re: Purpose of ring 0 and vendor prefixes (was: Re: Ringmark is now open source)

On Thu, 03 May 2012 16:05:33 +0200, Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com> wrote:
> On 5/3/12 10:42 AM, "James Graham" <jgraham@opera.com> wrote:
>> On 05/03/2012 10:19 AM, Tobie Langel wrote:
>>
>>> Isn't the vendor-prefix conversation already happening in the CSS WG?  
>>> If so, I suggest we just wait for the output of that group and apply it
>>> to the CG (and its test suites).
>>
>> I disagree. Irrespective of the decisions of the CSS WG, the goal of
>> this work should be a set of aspirational documents...
>> ... We should be working as hard as we can to *dis*courage
>> prefixed implementations in long-lived products and instead encourage
>> rapid convergence on the final prefix-free forms of new features.
>
> From your comment and others, It sounds like there's strong interest
> produce a Note about the various issues surrounding vendor prefixes,
> notably:
>
> - vendor prefix lifecycle,
> - what to do when prefix usage goes wrong (the -webkit saga),
> - steps to avoid prefix usage going wrong again in the future,
> - information about prefixes for devs (when and how to use them, if at
> all?),
> - vendor prefixes outside of CSS.
>
> James, would you be willing to do a first pass?

I'll put something (simple) in the wiki.

> I'd also really like to see some input from web developers on this  
> subject so as to have as balanced a perspective as possible.

Yes, indeed.

cheers

-- 
Charles 'chaals' McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
       je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg kan noen norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com

Received on Thursday, 3 May 2012 21:51:37 UTC