W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2010

RE: vendor prefix properties diverging from official properties

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 00:24:01 +0000
To: Zack Weinberg <zweinberg@mozilla.com>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <045A765940533D4CA4933A4A7E32597E10D5C6E8@TK5EX14MBXC111.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>


From: Zack Weinberg [mailto:zweinberg@mozilla.com] 


>Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> 2) For the nth time, no "additional feature" has been required here, 
>> at least by me. If you want to use your browser's corner gradient 
>> support you'd stick to -<vendor>-border-radius, which is all that 
>> exists today.

>I think divergence in behavior between -<vendor>-<property> and the unprefixed <property> is a terrible idea.  From the implementor side, we want the vendor-prefix name to be a trivial alias for the >unprefixed name.  From the Web author side, they want to write the unprefixed property and its value, then copy and paste it for every vendor they care about, add the prefixes, and be done -- especially, >not have to worry about one of them doing something slightly different than the others.

Given that this recommendation, as currently specified, may result in different renderings or no support for this behavior at all on some platforms, we will have divergences between implementations of the prefixed property. I'm not sure why that's a better alternative than using the prefixed version for its intended experimental purpose. I understand, however, that there may not be a precedent here and that maintaining both is unusual. 
Received on Thursday, 25 February 2010 00:24:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:24 GMT