- From: Mikko Rantalainen <mikko.rantalainen@peda.net>
- Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 13:28:02 +0300
- To: www-style@w3.org
2011-04-29 02:55 EEST: Rob Crowther:
> Could there be a shorthand syntax for vendor extensions, [...]
>
> At least if you could specify the general case and a few exceptions it
> would be a lot more straightforward eg.:
>
> @supports ( display: *-flex and *-column-count) and
> not ( -webkit-flex or -ms-column-count) {
> ...
> }
I don't think there's a need for such a shorthand syntax. If you are
willing to support all user agents that implement a random collection of
prefixed properties, the actual rules will be pretty hairy already. I
fail to see any great wins if the @supports declaration is short.
Instead, I'd rather see the explicit @supports rule that the author has
(hopefully) tested.
Those properties have prefixes exactly because they may differ in
notation and behavior when compared to final specification. There's no
way around this fact. The only proper "fix" would be to get vendor
prefixed properties standardized faster but nobody knows how to do that.
--
Mikko
Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2011 10:28:31 UTC