- From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 09:18:31 -0700
- To: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
- Cc: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, "www-style@w3.org Style" <www-style@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2012 16:19:22 UTC
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com> wrote: > On 22/02/2012 2:40 AM, David Singer wrote: > >> >> On Feb 21, 2012, at 5:40 , Alan Gresley wrote: >> >> On 21/02/2012 7:06 AM, David Singer wrote: >>> >>> I agree, it would be most helpful if they then *evangelized* the CSS >>>> prefix and 'ceased to mention' their old vendor prefixed version. Is >>>> that what you are asking? >>>> >>> >>> David. When using Safari 5, iPhone 4 (which I don't have), Chrome 17 or >>> even Firefox 10, I should *not see* a box-shadow in the below test. >>> >> >> I'm sorry, I don't understand what point you are trying to make. Can you >> explain? >> >> thx >> > > Once a browser supports a property that is un-prefixed (like box-shadow or > border-radius), it should drop support for it’s prefixed counterpart. I can see good reason for maintaining the prefixed version for some definite period of time, such as backward compatibility for existing usage, which may vary between a specific vendor prefixed version, which may maintain prior vendor semantics, and an unprefixed version, which may move away from prior implemented semantics.
Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2012 16:19:22 UTC