W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2005

Re: Supporting propriety "Extensions"

From: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 23:08:27 +0100
Message-ID: <421BAD5B.1050309@annevankesteren.nl>
To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
CC: www-style@w3.org

Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
> And what is the main reason of separating vendor-specific
> extensions (VSE) "Keywords and property names, beginning with -' or '_' are
> reserved for vendor-specific extensions."?
> 
> Anyway CSS parser already knows how to deal with something like:
> width: expression(my cool script goes here);
> and unknown attributes.
> 
> So what is the point? I cannot see any technical reasons for such a 
> strange way of
> VSE separations.

This addresses the future, not now. So that vendor extensions are not 
going to conflict with new W3C CSS specifications.


> I mean these '-' and '_' are only half of the problem - as this rule is 
> about identifiers only.
> There could be even different syntactic vendor specific constructions 
> (everybody know examples I guess)
> or even different length units as in our case (%%). BTW: my question 
> about vendor specific units left unanswered.
> E.g. someone would want to use something like "physical-pixel" instead 
> of current "logical-pixel" and the like...
> What to do?

Use _foo_%% I guess. (Where 'foo' represents your company.) Or -foo-%%.


-- 
  Anne van Kesteren
  <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Tuesday, 22 February 2005 22:50:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:35 GMT