Re: Vendor Prefix solutions

Am 10.02.2012 09:19 schrieb Matthew Wilcox:
> 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"?

Just a sidenote from a developer: I am right now dealing with rounded 
corners and box shadows, thus (ab)using vendor prefixes and even fancy 
stuff I do not really understand that makes my corners rounded in IE8 
and older.

Just as myself, many developers have not enough knowledge about the 
state of the art in every aspect of the evolution of web technologies to 
know exactly which property is at which state, and which syntax can be 
safely used in order to make their sites look as expected in as many UAs 
as possible. Trying to do it right, we google around and follow 
recommendations we find at Stackoverflow and such places. Thus, in order 
to reduce the amount of abuse, I'd suggest to create a kind of 
"official" collection of recommended syntaxes for the most common tasks.

I assume that most (ab)use of vendor prefixes (and fancy script-based 
solutions) is about:
- rounded corners
- box shadow
- text shadow
- transparency

Maybe I miss some, but I am sure there are not too many different topics 
here. A quasi-official page from browser vendors or the W3C on how to 
best do these would be highly appreciated, very helpful, and a way to 
reduce bad syntaxes out in the web.

Received on Friday, 10 February 2012 08:49:16 UTC