- From: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:03:58 +0100
- To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
Andrew Fedoniouk wrote: > > | I think Anne explained the need for it well enough: > | "This addresses the future, not now. So that vendor extensions are not > | going to conflict with new W3C CSS specifications." > | So we have established that there needs to be *some* kind of mechanism. > | Given that need, the CSS group came up with a convention of prefixing > | vendor-specific properties with -vendor-. I do not see what is so > | strange about the notation. > > First: Minus in identifiers creates troubles in the *present*. > It prevents to introduce formulas naturally. So use an underscore, as in my first suggestion. Ian also hinted at underscores talking about a _moz_ch unit. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Wednesday, 23 February 2005 09:04:29 UTC