- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 14:21:26 -0400
- To: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 5/4/12 2:14 PM, Alan Stearns wrote: > I do not think this would necessarily be the case. Experiments and > browser-specific features could still be added with a vendor prefix only. > We could mandate that the unprefixed version (aliased to the prefixed > version) could only come after the appropriate standards body had a > proposal in hand and agreed to work on it. That would work much better, yes. Another similar alternative is to allow unprefixed things earlier in the process than CR, but not as soon as a FPWD is published. Otherwise you easily get into situations like we had with transitions, where the draft doesn't reflect reality, the editor is AWOL, and everyone is reverse-engineering anyway, and yet prefixes are theoretically removed. That's pretty bad for authors too. -Boris
Received on Friday, 4 May 2012 18:22:22 UTC