- From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 11:42:53 -0700
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: whatwg <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Tao Bai <michaelbai@google.com>
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > On Thu, 26 Jun 2014, Tao Bai wrote: >> The brand color is super set of them and not limited to use in the >> navbutton or status bar, furthermore, not all browsers have navbutton or >> status concept, it makes developer confused. > > I don't think it confuses authors any more, and possibly a lot less, than > having three ways to do essentially the same thing. > >> The "msapplication-navbutton-color" and >> "apple-mobile-web-app-status-bar-style" are prefix and browser specific, >> brand-color is general and could be standard for all browsers. > > That the keywords are prefixed is a mistake made by the relevant vendors, > but I don't think it should stop us from using them if they are > appropriate. > > Looking at those two keywords more closely, it seems that > "apple-mobile-web-app-status-bar-style" wouldn't work because it doesn't > take a CSS colour, it takes some specific keywords. However, > "msapplication-navbutton-color", and, maybe better, > "msapplication-TileColor", seem like pretty good fits to me. I don't > really understand why one would avoid just reusing those, either instead > of, or at least as well as, a newer more generic term. If I were trying evangelize the use of this feature, I wouldn't want to recommend that web developers use a vendor-prefixed feature. I wish either Apple or Microsoft hadn't used a vendor-prefixed name, but they both did. Adam
Received on Thursday, 26 June 2014 18:43:50 UTC