W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2010

Re: TWO Change proposals for ISSUE-41 : Distributed Extensibility

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 07:36:06 -0700
Cc: Robert Ennals <robert.ennals@intel.com>, HTMLwg <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <656EE42E-C612-4047-A473-E8E458338C8B@apple.com>
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>

On Mar 18, 2010, at 7:27 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:

> "Robert Ennals" <robert.ennals@intel.com> wrote:
>> It is often useful for people to define extensions to HTML. These may
>> be vendor-specific experiments for features that may eventually get
>> folded into the main HTML spec.
> How can the prefix ever be gotten rid of once deployed?

Have vendor-prefixed versions of CSS properties ever been gotten rid  
of once deployed? (I honestly don't know - WebKit certainly supports  
some versions of properties with a prefix that we have also supported  
unprefixed for some time.)

Are there significant negative consequences from the continued  
existence of vendor-prefixed CSS properties in implementations?

Received on Thursday, 18 March 2010 14:36:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:59 UTC