W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2010

Re: vendor prefixes considered harmful

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:03:11 -0800
Message-ID: <4B8EEAAF.4040702@inkedblade.net>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 03/03/2010 08:54 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> That said, I am also OK with dropping vendor prefixes on particular
> properties that are known to be stable even if the spec they're in is
> not in CR yet. The problem is knowing what's stable. In the case of
> HTML5, there's a pretty simple resolution procedure for this: asking Ian
> gives a good first-order approximation. Is there a CSS equivalent?
> Perhaps parts of the spec should be annotated with per-section stability
> indicators, similar to how HTML5 operates?

I think lately we've been trying to split out into smaller modules,
reducing them to stable functionality sets so that they can get to
CR quicker. That makes per-section stability indicators less necessary.
HTML5 doesn't have this option, so per-section stability indicators
are used.

Also, approximations could be wrong. Before Brad redesigned the way
border-image works, I would have said it was stable.

Received on Wednesday, 3 March 2010 23:03:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:07:43 UTC