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

RE: Unprefixing CSS properties

From: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 23:15:55 +0000
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9710FCC2E88860489239BE0308AC5D1704483D31@TK5EX14MBXC264.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
>> At least for LOB sites.  For hobbyist and exploratory stuff (csszengarden.com), different rules apply.
>It's quite common for what you call "LOB" sites to use all sorts of 
>prefixed stuff right now; it's even commonly used incorrectly.  Again, 
>pretending that this doesn't happen is just setting us up to fail.

I don't think anyone's saying it doesn't happen.  What (at least) I am saying is that previous incarnations *forced* people to apply such hacks.  My understanding is that we're trying to move the technology to the point where such hacks are not required; transitioning of the content of the web forward in the same way will take time, no doubt.


>> As such, having different levels for the "ready" and "not ready" portions of technology is important.
>I agree that we need a distinction between "ready" and "not ready".  I'm 
>not convinced that our current method of drawing this distinction is 
>reasonable.

Propose an alternative for the WG to refine and consider.  Complaints without solution proposals don't go very far. :)


>> 5. I think you're making an argument for the ability for web authors to tag their markup such they
>> can say, for example, "my page is written for selectors 3 and will break for selectors 4".  Perhaps.
> No, I'm making the argument that the problem you seem to be worrying 
> about already exists and none of the things being proposed make it worse.

Well, we'll likely just have to agree to disagree here.  Spreading the problem to new properties makes it worse, IMO.


>I think close enough for now.  At least we're talking about the same things now.  ;)

Progress!
Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2011 23:16:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:46 GMT