W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2012

Re: prefixed values(RE: [CSSWG] Minutes and Resolutions Paris F2F Monday Morning 2012-02-06: Administrivia, Vendor Prefixes, Property/Value Alias OM)

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 10:31:35 +0100
Message-ID: <4F3CCCF7.6050001@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 02/08/2012 02:41 PM, Brian Manthos wrote:
> Given the current design of CSS holistically, and backgrounds specifically, properties interact.  Property and value treatments w/r/t prefixes need to be consistent, or at least compatible.
>
> I've only skimmed the notes so far, but there's also the issue of "equivalent values" in "all variants" is not always constructible (much less necessarily desirable) given that grammars change as the spec evolves (read: features come and go).  So in many cases this requirement isn't even theoretically possible, much less practical.

Note also the resolution was listed for official CSS aliasing, not
for vendor prefixing, and thus your concerns don't really apply.

~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 16 February 2012 16:05:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:50 GMT