

CSS vendor prefixes - Can we all get along - vladocar
http://www.vcarrer.com/2010/05/css-vendor-prefixes-can-we-all-get.html

======
kilian
Vendor prefixes are important because _different browsers implement work-in-
progress specs differently_. Theoretically (or practically, such as with
border-radius), given the same value, browser X will implement it vastly
different from browser Y.

Edit: rebuttal posted [http://kilianvalkhof.com/2010/css-xhtml/css-vendor-
prefixes-...](http://kilianvalkhof.com/2010/css-xhtml/css-vendor-prefixes-
considered-important/)

------
Rauchg
The problem is that there's no consensus on how certain features work and
their syntaxes/properties.

What -css3- property would we have for gradients if we have -moz-linear-
gradient[1] and -webkit-gradient(linear, [...])[2]

Of course, I think the syntax issues are trivial, compared to implementation
issues. If we go by the mantra that CSS should be _simple_ , I side with
Mozilla and their gradients syntax.

The bigger issue is _how_ certain properties operate. For example, how border-
radius and the box model play together, which is also different in my
experience in webkit and mozilla (specially as far as padding is involved)

[1] <https://developer.mozilla.org/en/CSS/-moz-linear-gradient>

[2] <http://webkit.org/blog/175/introducing-css-gradients/>

------
dman
This seems very similar to the opengl extension mechanism. Where people try
wild, crazy innovative stuff in an extension (similar to css prefixes). If the
experimental stuff takes off then it can be moved over to opengl core in a
future release.

