Re: Unprefixed properties and modules - RE: [CSSWG] Minutes and Resolutions Telecon 201-08-17 from Boris Zbarsky on 2011-08-18 (www-style@w3.org from August 2011)

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 19:44:51 -0400
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <4E4DA3F3.3010307@mit.edu>

On 8/18/11 10:52 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> No, it still needs to be in CR.  The idea was that we make it slightly
> harder to drop prefixes (only slightly - the browser gets to decide if
> they pass it "sufficiently", they just have to send an implementation
> report to the list justifying the decision), but simultaneously make
> it easier for individual features to lose their prefixes when the
> whole module hasn't yet been implemented.

Ah, ok.  That makes perfect sense.

-Boris

Received on Thursday, 18 August 2011 23:45:30 UTC