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

Re: Proposal to enable -css- prefix on transform and appearance

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 12:31:53 -0800
Message-ID: <4F46A239.9020707@jumis.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: "www-style@w3.org Style" <www-style@w3.org>
On 2/23/2012 8:38 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Charles Pritchard<chuck@jumis.com>  wrote:
>> If at all possible, it'd be great to see Mozilla, Opera, Microsoft and
>> Gapple pick up  -css- as a cross-vendor prefix:
>>
>> I'd like to see -css- supported in the next beta releases:
>>
>> The -css-transform family.
>> -css-appearance: none (and I think auto, or inherit, or whatever it is).
>>
>> It requires only minimal effort on the vendor developers, it's a "vendor"
>> prefix, so there are no rules, and we've got good consensus that appearance:
>> none is here to stay, and transform will happen eventually.
>>
>> Thank you for your consideration,
> What's the benefit of this?

There's a growing collection of names that are shared across 
implementations but are not ready to be unprefixed.
Starting with two very common features is an easy entry into a 
cross-vendor prefix.

Authors can still stack a vendor prefix after the common prefix if 
things aren't working out.

Such as:
-css-appearance: none;
-webkit-appearance: none;


Authors are already messing around with prefix land anyway:
http://leaverou.github.com/prefixfree/

This is a middle ground, proposed by David Singer, between rushing out 
recommendations and waiting years.
As an author, I think this would be helpful. And I would prefer -css- 
over -draft-.

-Charles
Received on Thursday, 23 February 2012 20:32:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:51 GMT