Re: vendor prefixes considered harmful

On 4/3/10 2:26 PM, Glen wrote:
> On 2010/03/24 21:58, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>> On 3/19/10 5:13 PM, Glen wrote:
>>> This would be used by all vendors who have an implementation matching
>>> the current WD.
>> What happens when the current WD changes?
> How many WDs would there be in most cases?

CSS3 Backgrounds has had 6 drafts so far

CSS3 Borders has had 4 drafts so far.

CSS3 Selectors has had 7 drafts so far.

> If there were just a few, you
> could use -wd1, -wd2 (as has been previously suggested), although that
> would mean that browsers would have to recognize multiple properties for
> BC. Not ideal I would imagine.

Not at all, no.

> Well, they have the same effect in most (simple) cases.

Yes, but "acts the same in the simple cases" is not the same as 
"interoperable enough to us the same name", by a long shot.

If we only cared about the simple cases we wouldn't need a standards 
body to start with; the simple cases of most things can be pinned down 
during a 1-hour dinnertime conversation.


Received on Sunday, 4 April 2010 03:04:13 UTC