It’s just data

Dominoes

Alex Russell: @glazou being entirely reasonable in the face of vendor-driven CRAZY (implementing other people’s prefixes): glazman.org/weblog/dotclea… Via @phae.

Alex, I think you need to move up the food chain a little.

The root-cause is vendor-driven advocacy directed at content producers which encourages them to produce compelling content using experimental features.  Everything else is consequences.  If you believe that those consequences are CRAZY, then you must conclude that the root-cause is CRAZY.


Maybe if features graduated from experimental to stable in less than 10 years (or even 5) it would be an incentive to content producers to wait for them. Just saying.

Also, isn’t using experimental features “in the wild” giving a huge feedback to implementors?

Posted by Thomas Broyer at

How long after stable features are available should it be that experimental features are retired?  Never is not working for us.

Posted by Sam Ruby at

So many vendors looking to implement the same prefix looks like an opportunity to me.  I’d like to see the standards body come out with guidance that all vendor prefixes will be deprecated in favor of a single prefix called -experimental-.

Posted by Kevin H at

Kevin H: there are no easy answers.  I believe that the original motivation was to prevent collisions.

Related: experimental MIME types use a prefix of x-.  To this day, every HTML form, like the one that you entered your comment on, uses application/x-www-form-urlencoded.

Experimental only works if one of the following are true: (a) it doesn’t get out into the wild, or (b) you are ruthless about removing support for the experiment once there is an official replacement.

The rounded corners on this site used to use browser specific CSS properties.  Over time, I moved to the standard.  But as the old markup still works, many haven’t bothered.  What this means is that their sites look better in Firefox or Webkit or whatever than they do in Internet Explorer.

To this day, -moz-border-radius is still supported by Firefox.  ("at least until the next version").  Something to think about the next time a Mozilla developer complains about sites with -webkit prefixes.

Note: Henri is actually one of the good guys in this, but still if anybody tells you that there are easy answers, they are oversimplifying the situation.  In a perfect world, everything would be spec’ed quickly and correctly the first time.  We just don’t happen to live in that perfect world.

Posted by Sam Ruby at

A common beta prefix sounds worth exploring to me.

Posted by Sam Ruby at

insightful social evaluation

Posted by Sam Ruby at

Maybe if features graduated from experimental to stable in less than 10 years (or even 5) it would be an incentive to content producers to wait for them. Just saying.

Vendor prefixes make features graduate more slowly, because they give the CSS WG the feeling that it’s OK to keep tweaking stuff. See [link]

(This is contrary to the popular belief that prefixes are instrumental for getting fast progress. Of course, the popular belief is proven wrong by HTML features that were introduced without prefix and evolved in place.)

Posted by Henri Sivonen at

A common beta prefix sounds worth exploring to me.

It’s not a solution. [link]

Posted by Henri Sivonen at

Add your comment