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

Re: Unprefixing CSS properties

From: Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:44:17 -0800
Message-ID: <4EC6EDD1.4020900@gmail.com>
To: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
I've been thinking about this issue for a long time, and I wrote some of 
my thoughts and ideas here: 
http://lea.verou.me/2011/11/vendor-prefixes-have-failed-whats-next/

(the blog post started as a mail to this list and then I thought it 
might interest others too)

-- 
Lea Verou (http://lea.verou.me | @LeaVerou)



On 15/11/11 20:02, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
> Web authors have complained a lot about excessive need for vendor 
> prefixing. Henri Sivonen has recently blogged about the damage 
> prefixing can do to the Web --- see 
> http://hsivonen.iki.fi/vendor-prefixes/.
>
> One observation is that when browser vendors already agree closely on 
> the syntax and semantics of a property, and when Web authors routinely 
> use the same property value for multiple engines' prefixed properties 
> and the unprefixed property, in public Web content, vendor prefixes 
> are providing negligible benefit and incur considerable costs --- or 
> outright harm. I think we can improve the situation in the short term 
> with relatively low risk by identifying properties whose specs are not 
> yet in CR, but where the spec is considered stable (but for whatever 
> reason not ready to enter CR, perhaps because it contains other 
> properties that aren't stable), and agreeing to encourage unprefixed 
> implementations of those properties. Naturally we still want 
> implementations to be reasonably conformant before shipping unprefixed.
>
> We had a meeting about this with some Mozilla developers today and 
> came up with a proposed list of properties/features which we think are 
> eligible for unprefixing:
>
> 2D Transforms: all properties
> 3D Transforms: all properties
> Transitions: all properties
> Animations: all properties (responses to feedback urgently need to be 
> added to the spec, and that should probably happen first)
> Conditional: nested @-rules (probably no-one would have prefixed this 
> anyway)
> Images: image() value, 'object-*', 'image-*'
> Text: 'tab-size', 'hyphens', 'text-align-last', 'text-decoration-*'
> Values: a subset of calc() (the intersection of what IE9 and Gecko 
> implement), the new units
> Selectors 4: :matches, :any-link, :nth-match, :nth-last-match, 
> :column, :nth-column, :nth-last-column
>
> Any objections? :-)
>
> Rob
> -- 
> "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 1:8-10]
Received on Friday, 18 November 2011 23:44:49 GMT

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