Re: Selectors, vendor prefixes (again...) and IE9 and Opera and WebKit

If every UA has an implementation of ::selection,
I would prefer keeping it unprefixed an introduce
a new draft defining only ::selection, so that we
could advance on this projet whithout slowdown-
ing the rest of the CSS3 Selectors API.

Vendor-prefixing is not fair.

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Daniel Glazman" <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 12:41 PM
To: "Philippe Wittenbergh" <ph.wittenbergh@l-c-n.com>
Cc: "www-style list" <www-style@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Selectors, vendor prefixes (again...) and IE9 and Opera and 
WebKit

> Le 14/05/10 12:23, Philippe Wittenbergh a écrit :
>
>> I don't want to disappoint you, but WebKit also supports ::selection (no 
>> vendor prefix).
>
> Then WebKit should move back to ::-webkit-selection too.
>
> Weird feelings to see that something everyone agreed to remove from a
> spec because "at risk" is implemented w/o prefix and even w/o a common
> definition as if it were already a standard.
>
> I am requesting from Microsoft, Opera and the WebKit team an email to
> this list explaining *precisely* their specification of ::selection.
>
> Mozilla, please also contribute a mail about ::-moz-selection possibly
> more precise than the contents of [1].
>
> In particular, please document the edge cases, inheritance, etc.
> The CSS WG will then decide what to do with this pseudo.
>
> FWIW, I am myself _strongly_ in favor of going back to vendor prefixes.
> I am fed up of seeing vendors not doing what they recommend to
> others.
>
> [1] https://developer.mozilla.org/En/CSS/::selection
>
> </Daniel>
> --
> W3C CSS WG, Co-chair
>
>

Received on Friday, 14 May 2010 10:55:17 UTC