Re: Offline transcript

On Jan 3, 2013 8:11 AM, "Mat Scales" <mat@wibbly.org.uk> wrote:
>
> "prefixing is the worst form of compatibility protection, except for all
the others"
>
> Sorry for resurrecting this discussion, I was away from email for a
couple of weeks.
>
> I don't like prefixing but I am swayed by Brian's arguments and think
that it is the only practical option.
>
> However, I'm not sure I like "x-" as a prefix. "x-" in my mind says
"custom", i.e. not standard at all. I would propose that nExt Web forward
polyfills use a named prefix, perhaps "nextweb" or "nw". As this becomes
known it will allow developers to make a distinction between user
extensions and community supported proto-specifications.
>
>

I could potentially be convinced otherwise, but it does seem that recently
we have made good ground in x- as a universal author extension prefix in
css and html - so that was my thinking there...

we can provide links to those discussions if necessary...

Brian Kardell :: @briankardell :: hitchjs.com



> On 20 December 2012 16:21, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Clint Hill wrote:
>>
>> > Marcos: I think actually what you wrote and what I wrote are in
alignment as it relates to standards …
>> >
>> > > > Further: My dislike of prefixing is to this point. I would prefer
to write against a "standard" goal. Which would imply that I write my
implementation against a "standard" API. While this means in prollyfill it
wouldn't be a recognized standard by any standards body immediately it does
mean that my implementation code is choosing it as "standard".
>> > >
>> > > This is perverting the definition of a "standard". A standard has to
be agreed upon by a set of entities (or it may be a de facto standard - if
it is not ratified by any authority and has a large enough market share).
>> >
>> > I'm simply saying that as a dev I'd prefer to write against a
"standard" - that being recognized by a body or being de facto. And I
strongly believe that nExt Web will provide that confidence to devs. Which
is to say that if it's the nExt Web prefix I can be comforted knowing it's
a trusted prefix (and only 1).
>> >
>> > I've spent the last few days considering all this. I've always
maintained that I understand/agree to prefixes, but have suspected/believed
there could be an effort to avoid them. I'm on the side of prefixes now,
but I will consistently push to make the fact of a prefix not create
forward/backward compatibility (because I dislike this notion of
implementation code that suits no purpose semantically or syntactically).
>> I strongly agree. If we can address that as a group, we should. Having
said that, prefixing seems like a "safe" starting point.
>> >
>> > And I totally agree with Marcos: Code is king here and I think there
should be more efforts on that.
>> >
>>
>> I'd like to research some techniques. We should look at Modernizr and
friends for this.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Marcos Caceres
>>
>>
>>
>>