| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision |
| spec:vendor-prefixes [2015/11/06 20:24] – florian | spec:vendor-prefixes [2015/11/06 20:25] (current) – [open questions] florian |
|---|
| ====== CSS Vendor Prefixes ====== | |
| <note warning>This page is preserved out of historical interest, but the guidance and rules it suggests are NOT the policy of the CSS Working Group. After much discussion (and this page is part of that discussion), the CSSWG adopted a different set of guidelines, as recorded in [[http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS/#future-proofing|section 3.2 of the CSS 2015 Snapshot]]</note> | <note warning>This page is preserved out of historical interest, but the guidance and rules it suggests are NOT the policy of the CSS Working Group. After much discussion (and this page is part of that discussion), the CSSWG adopted a different set of guidelines, as recorded in [[http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS/#future-proofing|section 3.2 of the CSS 2015 Snapshot]]</note> |
| |
| |
| | ====== CSS Vendor Prefixes ====== |
| In CSS we use [[http://www.w3.org/wiki/Evolution/Identifiers|vendor prefixes]] for properties, values, @-rules that are: | In CSS we use [[http://www.w3.org/wiki/Evolution/Identifiers|vendor prefixes]] for properties, values, @-rules that are: |
| * [[http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#vendor-keywords|vendor specific extensions (per CSS 2.1)]], or | * [[http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#vendor-keywords|vendor specific extensions (per CSS 2.1)]], or |
| ===== open questions ===== | ===== open questions ===== |
| ==== When to implement un-prefixed features ==== | ==== When to implement un-prefixed features ==== |
| | <note warning>This page is preserved out of historical interest, but the guidance and rules it suggests are NOT the policy of the CSS Working Group. After much discussion (and this page is part of that discussion), the CSSWG adopted a different set of guidelines, as recorded in [[http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS/#future-proofing|section 3.2 of the CSS 2015 Snapshot]]</note> |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| When is the best time to implement the unprefixed version of a feature? | When is the best time to implement the unprefixed version of a feature? |
| |
| |
| ==== When to drop vendor-prefixed features ==== | ==== When to drop vendor-prefixed features ==== |
| | <note warning>This page is preserved out of historical interest, but the guidance and rules it suggests are NOT the policy of the CSS Working Group. After much discussion (and this page is part of that discussion), the CSSWG adopted a different set of guidelines, as recorded in [[http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS/#future-proofing|section 3.2 of the CSS 2015 Snapshot]]</note> |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| When is the best time to drop support for the vendor-prefixed version of a feature? | When is the best time to drop support for the vendor-prefixed version of a feature? |
| |
| |
| ==== Is it okay to implement unprefixed features in a post-CR LCWD ==== | ==== Is it okay to implement unprefixed features in a post-CR LCWD ==== |
| | <note warning>This page is preserved out of historical interest, but the guidance and rules it suggests are NOT the policy of the CSS Working Group. After much discussion (and this page is part of that discussion), the CSSWG adopted a different set of guidelines, as recorded in [[http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS/#future-proofing|section 3.2 of the CSS 2015 Snapshot]]</note> |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| Is it okay to implement unprefixed features when a CR is taken back to Last Call for non-trivial changes? | Is it okay to implement unprefixed features when a CR is taken back to Last Call for non-trivial changes? |
| |
