W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2009

Re: Feature queries

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 10:34:26 -0600
Message-ID: <dd0fbad0912110834y5642f3aeh16d3c9b520dc3f07@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 2:32 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:32:51 +0100, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> You could say that about any use of -webkit-box-reflect though. Apple is
>> not likely to phase it out soon if it is in widespread use.
>
> That depends on whether box-reflect is also used. At least you do not end up
> in the weird situation where you have to support a phased out property
> solely to keep cnn.com working because of a silly feature query that uses it
> to enable some other properties. And you do create the need for others user
> agents with less market share to also support that property (maybe just for
> parsing) to also get cnn.com to work.
>
> If this gets widely deployed we might end up vastly increasing the
> complexity for new Web browsers to enter the market which would be a very
> bad thing. (It is already not at all simple.)

This is an argument in support of fantasai's second proposal, the
!supports thing.  It's harder to misuse that, as you end up applying
the rule that you're conditioning one.  You can still do a no-op in
certain cases (like a text-shadow:0 0 transparent; rule), but that's
not generally something you can get away with.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 11 December 2009 16:34:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 03:47:12 GMT