Re: Vendor Prefixes and Generic Prefixes: who shall use which when and why?

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:

> On 2/7/12 8:58 AM, Christoph Päper wrote:
>
>>  dbaron: The more we can unprefix, perhaps the less we have this problem.
>>>  tantek: One possible proposal is to only parse other vendors' prefixes
>>> in
>>>          conjunction with parsing unprefixed.
>>>
>>
>> That’s a minimum requirement. Anything less should not even be considered
>> for discussion.
>>
>
> The only way to do that is to change the unprefixing policy of this
> working group and unprefix a whole bunch of things right now.
>

i'm not sure if IPR issues have yet been discussed in this context, but i
believe we can't simply standardize currently prefixed properties without
first introducing them into scope of the WG according to W3C IPR practices

of course, if the prefixed version matches (without modification)
preliminary specifications already developed within WG scope, then this
would not be a barrier

please correct me if i have the wrong impression