- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 14:45:50 -0800
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Leif Arne Storset <lstorset@opera.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 01/27/2011 02:19 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:18 PM, fantasai<fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: >> On 01/27/2011 09:14 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 3:47 AM, Leif Arne Storset<lstorset@opera.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> The 'object-fit' and 'object-position' properties ask: >>>> >>>> # Do we need to allow browsers to alias ‘image-position’ >>>> # and ‘image-fit’ (the old names for these properties) >>>> # to these properties? Does any browser actually need >>>> # to do so? >>>> >>>> I believe only Opera has implemented these, and they were released with >>>> the >>>> 'object-' names from the beginning. Besides, they were prefixed, so I >>>> don't >>>> think it would matter anyway. >>> >>> Removed, thanks for the clarification! >> >> They weren't there for browser implementations, Tab, they >> were there for printer implementations. I don't think you >> should have removed that. > > Were they unprefixed in printers? They might have been. I'll have to check with HP. ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 27 January 2011 22:46:24 UTC