- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 10:51:31 +0200
- To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 4:01 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > 4. Backwards compat should be preserved unless there's a very good > reason otherwise Are the proposed comma removals backwards-compatible in the sense that prefixed properties would work with extra commas if unprefixed? (It seems to me that wouldn't be the case.) Without that kind of compatibility with what's deployed, I expected it to be very confusing to authors if dropping prefixes needs to be couples with dropping well-selected commas, too. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Friday, 20 January 2012 08:52:02 UTC