- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 07:53:25 -0800
- To: Sebastian Zartner <sebastianzartner@gmail.com>
- CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 11/6/12 5:22 AM, Sebastian Zartner wrote: > Just because some JS library developers are not fast enough catching up > with unprefixing things in Gecko is not a reason to avoid prefixing. No, you don't understand. There should be no "catching up" involved. Gecko currently supports both "transform" and "-moz-transform". But these libraries _still_ break. Furthermore, they will likewise break for anyone else who implements a property called "transform". And as a result, users can't use websites. Web developers are trying to author sites, and those don't work. This is not a theoretical harm here. > Introducing new / experimental things without prefixing them will cause > much more problems in the future in case their sytnax / logic changes. If their syntax changes there is no problem. Note that I'm not suggesting we blindly ship unprefixed stuff. For example, we're shipping unprefixed @supports right now, but there is no problem, because it's not enabled by default. This is likely to be the model Gecko follows from now. > Instead people should be better prepared for what's coming next Yes, and we should all have puppies and Unicorns. > and support for the prefixed properties should be kept for one or two engine > versions You clearly didn't read my original mail. Please do go do that now. I'll wait. > before they are completely dropped to give people time to adapt > their code. No one dropped anything. -Boris
Received on Tuesday, 6 November 2012 15:53:59 UTC