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

Re: Supporting propriety "Extensions"

From: Jonny Axelsson <jax@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 09:45:22 +0100
To: "Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com>, www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <opsmm6lwp7oh2a7v@northpole.upc.no>

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 21:50:25 -0800, Andrew Fedoniouk  
<news@terrainformatica.com> wrote:

> 2) Life is life. There are differences (including different attribute  
> sets)
> and bugs in different UA implementations. This is a reality.
> If we really want to help authors to deal with
> this then we should invent something like
>
> @in_case_of  public_ua_name_1
> {
>    ....
> }
> @in_case_of  public_ua_name_2
> {
>  ...
> }
> @otherwise
> {
>    ....
> }

These extensions aren't necessarily browser-specific. In the case of Opera  
we support -wap-properties, CSS extensions made by another consortium,  
then WAP Forum (now Open Mobile Alliance). The -xv-properties are W3C  
properties, just in an early stage of development. We could have wanted to  
support e.g. -moz-opacity even though we're not Mozilla.

Having User Agent-specific sections have been discussed earlier and may be  
discussed again. They are ugly, could be abused, and to some extent would  
be admitting failure. On the other hand there are many CSS hacks in use  
that easily could cause more damage. CSS can handle unknown properties  
quite easily, but parsing errors and destructive errors in implementations  
can be harder to work around for an author.

For non-standard properties an @-rule would in any case be an inferiour  
solution in my view.

-- 
Jonny Axelsson, Documentation, Opera Software ASA
Received on Wednesday, 23 February 2005 08:46:14 GMT

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