Platform/Layout/CSS Compatibility: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Very UNLIKELY that we're going to support webkit prefixes. Turned this corner a while ago and we should make this clear now so we indicate our current (better) position.
(→‎problematic sites: m.twitter.com fixed)
(Very UNLIKELY that we're going to support webkit prefixes. Turned this corner a while ago and we should make this clear now so we indicate our current (better) position.)
Line 1: Line 1:
= CSS vendor-prefix compatibility =
= CSS vendor-prefix compatibility =


'''Problem: WebKit mobile web monoculture.''' There is currently a WebKit mobile web monoculture, numerous sites that have WebKit-specific content and reduced content/style/functionality for everyone else, despite numerous evangelists at Mozilla, Opera, and Microsoft working with web developers to publish standards-based cross-browser content.
'''Problem: WebKit mobile web monoculture.''' There is currently (still) a WebKit mobile web monoculture, numerous sites that have WebKit-specific content and reduced content/style/functionality for everyone else, despite numerous evangelists at Mozilla, Opera, and Microsoft working with web developers to publish standards-based cross-browser content.


'''What is Mozilla doing about the problem?'''
'''What is Mozilla doing about the problem?'''
Line 9: Line 9:


'''Is Firefox going to support WebKit prefixes?'''
'''Is Firefox going to support WebKit prefixes?'''
* Very likely, on properties Mozilla deems necessary according to our [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=708406 study of -webkit- dependent sites].
* '''Very UNLIKELY''' - per our [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=708406 study of -webkit- dependent sites] and experiments with some -webkit- prefix support see if it fixes sites (answer: very few, and even breaks some).


'''If so, when is that happening?'''
'''If so, when is that happening?'''
* We don't have a specific release or date yet. We are continuing to study which sites appear to require Webkit-prefixed properties, and if implementing them actually fixes those sites or not (WebKit-specific sites sometimes depend on other WebKit-specific features, e.g.: touch events, WebSQL, etc.)
* We don't have a specific release or date yet. We are continuing to study which sites appear to require Webkit-prefixed properties, and if implementing them actually fixes those sites or not (WebKit-specific sites sometimes depend on other WebKit-specific features, e.g.: touch events, WebSQL, etc.)


For more details, read on, and see also [http://www.alistapart.com/articles/the-vendor-prefix-predicament-alas-eric-meyer-interviews-tantek-celik/ A List Apart: The Vendor Prefix Predicament].
For more details, read on, and see also  
* [http://www.alistapart.com/articles/the-vendor-prefix-predicament-alas-eric-meyer-interviews-tantek-celik/ A List Apart: The Vendor Prefix Predicament]
* [https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!msg/mozilla.dev.platform/itl6mtx2dxI/mbdPvbexB2EJ Policy for experimental CSS features in Gecko]


__TOC__
__TOC__
Line 40: Line 42:
* Prioritize [[standards]] for commonly used -webkit- prefixed properties.
* Prioritize [[standards]] for commonly used -webkit- prefixed properties.
** [[CSS/text-size-adjust|text-size-adjust]]
** [[CSS/text-size-adjust|text-size-adjust]]
** [[CSS3]] Animations
** [[CSS3]] Animations (Mozilla ships unprefixed support)
** CSS3 Transitions
** CSS3 Transitions (Mozilla ships unprefixed support)
** CSS3 Transforms
** CSS3 Transforms (Mozilla ships unprefixed support)
* Consider implementing some -webkit- prefixed properties.
* Consider implementing some -webkit- prefixed properties.
** Experiment with implementation and see if that fixes sites (the efficacy test).
** Experiment with implementation and see if that fixes sites (the efficacy test).
*** So far, efficacy is poor (very few sites are fixed), and there are negative side-effects (some sites got ''worse'' with -webkit- prefixes).


== straw proposal downsides ==
== straw proposal downsides ==
Line 52: Line 55:
== possible downside mitigation ==
== possible downside mitigation ==
* In the short term we can at least remove pain for web authors and users.
* In the short term we can at least remove pain for web authors and users.
* In the long term we can ensure the unprefixed properties (in CR drafts) work and encourage authors to switch to them.
* In the long term we can ensure the unprefixed properties (in CR drafts) work and encourage authors to switch to them. Done for:
* ...
** transforms
** transitions
** animations
** border-image
 
See and try <cite>[http://dbaron.org/log/20130225-removing-prefixes How you can help with removing -moz- prefixes]</cite>.


== questions and methodology ==
== questions and methodology ==
Line 83: Line 91:
** put the energy first into contributing and passing test suites instead.
** put the energy first into contributing and passing test suites instead.
* ...
* ...
See also: [https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!msg/mozilla.dev.platform/itl6mtx2dxI/mbdPvbexB2EJ Policy for experimental CSS features in Gecko].


== meetings minutes discussions ==
== meetings minutes discussions ==
Line 144: Line 154:
* Propose -webkit- properties to implement in Firefox Mobile, each based on specific data from [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=708406 bug 708406].
* Propose -webkit- properties to implement in Firefox Mobile, each based on specific data from [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=708406 bug 708406].
** -webkit-... due to prevalence of usage in x% of sites ...
** -webkit-... due to prevalence of usage in x% of sites ...
* ...
* (none so far that are justified by the experiments done / data collected)


== Data on vendor-specific prefixes ==
== Data on vendor-specific prefixes ==
Bureaucrats, canmove, Confirmed users, Interface administrators
3,156

edits

Navigation menu