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

RE: Selectors, vendor prefixes (again...) and IE9

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 18:45:21 +0000
To: François REMY <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>, "Daniel Glazman" <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <045A765940533D4CA4933A4A7E32597E2148D070@TK5EX14MBXC120.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
> From: François REMY [mailto:fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr]
> Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2010 11:57 AM
> To: Sylvain Galineau; Daniel Glazman

 
> In fact, I think the whole idea behind the vendor prefix is bad.

I don't think it's bad or good. Like many things, it's what you 
use it for and how. Prefix problems are largely a symptom of 
more important issues. We're better off talking about those imo.

The thing most worth discussing about the -webkit-test-size-adjust 
'incident' is not that Microsoft chose to parse -webkit but why it 
did so, and what the WG will do about it. The real web is telling us 
this property should be considered for standardization. *This* is the 
high-order bit. That Microsoft pulled back should not be the end of 
this part of the discussion. This issue is thus, imo, not resolved.

Same for ::selection. Whether and when and who puts a prefix in 
- or back in - is secondary to defining what the unprefixed feature 
should do and how it should work. With all major browsers now 
supporting it in one way or another, it is the WG's job to find 
a converging path.

Because prefixes are meant to be temporary, I don't want to spend
huge amounts of time designing them or formal processes and 
policies to 'manage' them. They're not a feature. The goal,
after all, is to get rid of them eventually.

You may certainly argue it takes too long to get rid of them. But 
I don't think we'll accelerate the spec process by arguing about 
their fairness or lack thereof or coming up with elaborate rules 
governing their appearance, disappearance and resurrection. 

But it'd still be nice to set a clear, simple and explicit set of 
expectations on their proper use. It doesn't have to be formal. 
A set of examples and summary guidelines may be helpful.
Received on Monday, 17 May 2010 18:46:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:27 GMT