Re: Vendor Prefix solutions

I agree with all of you that vendor-prefix from our perspective is
fine and there's no *technical* problem.

However the world isn't made of responsible web developers, those are
rare. So the feature is being abused - to the point where vendors are
about to implement -webkit- support in all browsers. That's the point
they feel pushed to. If that happens, standards fail.

So the problem is "how do we stop the abuse"?

I would ordinarily be all for "let the poor developers pay the
consequences of their ineptitude/inexperience", but it simply isn't
happening like that because browser vendors are not allowing that to
happen. Instead, they let poor developers get away with it by
supporting other vendor's prefixes. That is unacceptable.

So, we have to offer a solution that works /better than/ vendor
prefixes in the real world. Not just on paper.

The point of this thread is to explore options for that. Not to argue
about vendor-prefix. That argument is already lost, and the nail in
the coffin will be when public versions of browsers support other
vendors prefixes.



On 9 February 2012 23:08, Ernie Bello <ernie@ern.me> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Matthew Wilcox <elvendil@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> But, the main problem really is that vendors are shipping support for
>> experimental features in production, public targeted, browsers. Can we
>> not suggest vendors come to a mutual agreement to lock prefixes to
>> development builds, and remove them from public shipping builds? This
>> stops the uneducated developer being able to mis-use experimental
>> features, whilst allowing knowledgable developers to experiment in
>> safety. It also forces a progressive-enhancement mentality. And stops
>> browser vendor competition 'point scoring' which is causing long-term
>> harm.
>
>
> I disagree that this is a problem. The inexperience of a developer should
> not be a reason to hinder innovation. The tedious exercise of having to list
> many prefixes for different browsers provides a deterrent, fulfilling the
> dual purpose of making a developer think twice and providing the browser
> vendors the ability to push boundaries in a safe sandbox. Putting vendor
> prefixes only in dev builds effectively means the features won't be used,
> and stalls the entire standards process.

Received on Friday, 10 February 2012 08:20:21 UTC