W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > November 2011

Re: Unprefixing CSS properties

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 18:26:32 +1300
Message-ID: <CAOp6jLYeOScWaQKLO+zsS=Ww7dbOxbvdjy2qkDXofD7qr1h=7A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
Cc: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>wrote:

> If it’s not ready to CR, it’s not ready to unprefix.  I thought that was
> the general working model of the CSSWG.

Yes. I'm suggesting a change to that model.

That might mean moving the “not ready” parts to “next” (3 to 4, 4 to 5,
> etc.) so they don’t hold up the “ready” parts.  It might mean splitting
> modules into smaller pieces as well.

Those are good things to do as well.

 Sidestepping the system because it’s inconvenient produces harm in the
> near term and long term as well as potentially the really long term
> (box-model width example).

In that case, I think a lot less harm would have been incurred for everyone
if we had simply made box-sizing:border-box the default.

I think in cases where authors are already widely producing content using
the unprefixed property and assuming that the behavior will match the
behavior of the vendor-prefixed properties, "sidestepping the system" can't
produce any new harm, and it will reduce other harm.

Even if authors aren't using the unprefixed property widely, if the
behavior is clear and uncontroversial then the harm of unprefixing should
be minimal.

Just skimming some of the others...****
> **·         **transitions – the timing function property has an expanded
> grammar in ED relative to WD****
> **·         **animations – the timing function property has an expanded
> grammar in ED relative to WD

Those are totally OK since the changes are backwards compatible.

> ****
> **·         **images – significant grammar changes proposed for
> radial-gradient; variety of changes in other sections

I deliberately excluded gradients.

"If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not
in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us
our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not
sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us." [1 John
Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2011 05:27:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:52 UTC