- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 18:02:03 -0700
- To: "Eric A. Meyer" <eric@meyerweb.com>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
On 7/12/10 5:51 PM, Eric A. Meyer wrote: >> But you and Brad want different things to be supported. You want >> support for an alias for the unprefixed property, whereas he wants >> versioned support of all versions of the prefixed property the browser >> has implemented. > > If we could settle on one or the other, would that mean we'd cleared the > last hurdle? Or even the last major hurdle? If you settled on your version, it sounds to me like IE and Webkit would find that unacceptable (though I obviously can't speak for them). My position, already stated, is that this version is fundamentally no different from Mozilla's current behavior except in requiring a bit more work from the UA and giving authors the false impression that their use of prefixed properties is safe. If you settled on Brad's version, Mozilla would almost certainly find that unacceptable due to the need to maintain the multiple incompatible codepaths involved. Both versions have the problem David Baron pointed out. -Boris
Received on Tuesday, 13 July 2010 01:02:38 UTC