- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 18:14:26 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
On Wednesday 2013-07-17 14:57 -0700, L. David Baron wrote: > I would prefer this to be done without a vendor prefix, since the > property will be implemented by multiple vendors. I don't want each > vendor implementing it to have to use its own vendor prefix (adding > to the burden for authors, and increasing the risk of more > browser-specific content), nor do I want to introduce the precedent > of one browser implementing another browser's prefixes (which > increases the chance of baking those prefixes into the Web platform > permanently, which is even uglier). Well, given the substantial negative feedback on the list about this proposal, plus the lack of any positive feedback from other implementors, I'm going to make the call that we're going to do this with a vendor prefix, even though I really dislike adding new platform features with vendor prefixes. (We're not the first vendor adding this particular feature with a vendor prefix, though.) -David -- 𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂 𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
Received on Friday, 26 July 2013 01:14:48 UTC