- From: Zack Weinberg <zweinberg@mozilla.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 16:38:06 -0800
- To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote: > > >Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote: > >> 2) For the nth time, no "additional feature" has been required > >> here, at least by me. If you want to use your browser's corner > >> gradient support you'd stick to -<vendor>-border-radius, which is > >> all that exists today. > > >I think divergence in behavior between -<vendor>-<property> and the > >unprefixed <property> is a terrible idea. [...] > > Given that this recommendation, as currently specified, may result in > different renderings or no support for this behavior at all on some > platforms, we will have divergences between implementations of the > prefixed property. I'm not sure why that's a better alternative than > using the prefixed version for its intended experimental purpose. Web authors don't think of the prefixed version of a property as a different thing from its unprefixed official version, see. Divergence among implementations for one equivalence class of property names is normal and expected, although resented, by Web authors. Divergence *within one implementation* between a property and its vendor-prefixed variant is unprecedented to the best of my knowledge, except possibly for backward compatibility. zw
Received on Thursday, 25 February 2010 00:38:40 UTC