SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 41 of 41
  1. #26
    It's all Geek to me silver trophybronze trophy
    ralph.m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, AU
    Posts
    24,297
    Mentioned
    460 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    I don't understand why if there's going to be a prefix, there should be one for every vendor. A single unified prefix like say "-development-do-not-use-in-production-sites" or something
    I still don't understand why there has to be a goddam prefix at all.

    EDIT: I mean, yes, I get the idea that the final version of border-radius might end up different from -webkit-border-radius, but as far as I'm concerned, that's just too bad for people who wanted to jump in early.

  2. #27
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ralph.m View Post
    EDIT: I mean, yes, I get the idea that the final version of border-radius might end up different from -webkit-border-radius, but as far as I'm concerned, that's just too bad for people who wanted to jump in early.
    Hence my joke absurdly long prefix that says EXACTLY what all those other prefixes should actually mean.

    Because you're right -- you jump the gun implementing something still in draft on a production site, you should get EXACTLY what's coming to you when/if it breaks in the future... or breaks when someone doesn't have the same magical combination of display, OS and software, or breaks on legacy, or ends up slower/more bloated for nothing compared to current recommendations.

    But of course, nobody actually cares what "Beta" or "draft" mean anymore. New/shiney now! Now! NOW! who cares how bad it bends you over the table in the future. Of course, if we didn't have this attitude there'd be no such thing as credit... Pay more later for something you can't afford now -- ABSOFRAGGINGLUTELY BRILLIANT!!!

  3. #28
    padawan silver trophybronze trophy markbrown4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    4,115
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    I thought one of Remy's suggestions was the best, that browsers should only have the prefixes available in nightly / beta builds.
    That way, only those really interested in testing and giving feedback will use them, that was their intention.

  4. #29
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by markbrown4 View Post
    I thought one of Remy's suggestions was the best, that browsers should only have the prefixes available in nightly / beta builds.
    That way, only those really interested in testing and giving feedback will use them, that was their intention.
    That does make the most sense -- if they exist just for testing (which is the entire point of the vendor prefixes) then they should only be available in 'testing' builds of the browser... like Opera Next, like IE developer previews... like... wait, do FF/Chrome/Saffy have equivalents other than the 'build it yourself from source'? Never paid enough attention to those...

  5. #30
    padawan silver trophybronze trophy markbrown4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    4,115
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

  6. #31
    Under Construction silver trophybronze trophy AussieJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    776
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Or if you don't want the dev channel of Chrome or Firefox, as they can sometimes be a little crash happy, there are the betas at http://www.google.com/landing/chrome/beta/ and http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox...a/beta-desktop.

    (The good thing about being on a different release channel with Chrome and Firefox is that you'll stay on that channel for automatic updates too, so latest beta/dev releases will get pushed out to you.)
    Last edited by AussieJohn; Feb 11, 2012 at 16:47. Reason: typo fix
    var details = {
    . . web: "afterlight.com.au",
    . . photos: "jvdl.id.au",
    . . psa: "usethelatestversion.com"
    }

  7. #32
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks -- so yeah; if your going to have experimental elements, attributes and properties, what are they doing in the 'stable'/public releases? That suggestion makes perfect sense in that light; it belongs in the above listed versions -- beta/nightly/dev -- and nowhere else.

  8. #33
    It's all Geek to me silver trophybronze trophy
    ralph.m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, AU
    Posts
    24,297
    Mentioned
    460 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Eric Meyer doesn't think this vendor prefix thing will end well.

    How depressing. When I got into web design 4 or 5 years ago, I discovered that this discipline was emerging from a dark age of browser wars and non-standardization. I've watched as browsers have improved—even IE—to the point where we can be pretty confident that a good design will hold up cross browser. And I was inspired by web standards, and progressive enhancement, and so on ...

    And then came HTML5, and the premature rush to use it, with sites drugged to the eyeballs with life-supporting JS. And now this crazy rush to befoul the web to satiate the gee-ain't-it-cool brigade that is high on fanciful vendor prefixes. As if our world weren't already choking on fads, fashions and tabloid noise.

    Sigh. Well, there isn't much I can do about it, but as an act of protest, I'm resolved never again to use vendor prefixes, but just use things like border-radius, and not worry if it's not supported by a lot of browsers.

  9. #34
    Life is not a malfunction gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy
    TechnoBear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Argyll, Scotland
    Posts
    6,357
    Mentioned
    268 Post(s)
    Tagged
    5 Thread(s)
    There is a petition against the proposals here.

  10. #35
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Aaaaand there we are. Opera confirms webkit prefix usage. Because they had no other choice.

    Thanks, mobile web developers and large corporate clients who thought mobile==iPhone app! You've made the world a crappier place for the rest of us, and broken what use there was for browser prefixes.

  11. #36
    Mazel tov! bronze trophy kohoutek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Hamburg, Germany
    Posts
    4,248
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Meh. That's weak. And it's even weaker that they choose to support only "some" of the widely used prefixes. That's neither here nor there and will cause even more problems down the line. Either be consequent or don't change anything at all.
    Maleika E. A. | Rockatee | Twitter | Dribbble



  12. #37
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    The "some" was Tantek's idea: support the essential-to-not-brokenness ones, not the gee-whiz-look-at-iDesign ones. Likely ideally ones that Opera already supports under the -o prefix or as non-prefixed properties, and possibly a few that might otherwise remain webkit-only.

  13. #38
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Stomme poes View Post
    Likely ideally ones that Opera already supports under the -o prefix or as non-prefixed properties, and possibly a few that might otherwise remain webkit-only.
    ... which is exactly why they blame site authors for the move -- and it IS where it belongs. There are so many tutorials out there right now who claim to tell you about CSS3, but then only use the -webkit, or if you're lucky both it and -moz...

    WITHOUT EVEN LISTING THE PREFIXLESS VERSION!!! In which case, they aren't even ABOUT CSS3... they're about browser specific properties. You'll constantly see text where it's -webkit-this and -webkit-that, then at the end they MIGHT mention -moz or occasionally -o and -ms -- again without mentioning adding the prefixless versions.

    Developers, the majority are their own worse enemy -- hardly surprising when the majority of people who call themselves 'experts' at making websites online don't even seem to know how to use simple tags like LABEL, TH or numbered headings properly. When they can't even get markup right and have their heads permanently wedged up 1998's backside (hence HTML 5 - the new transitional) is it any shock we have browser prefixes being talked about BEFORE the prefixless actual CSS3 properties? Again, Welcome to your 1998 behavior much as Mallory had in her original post, "Best viewed in ____".

    Progress... that's what it is. RIGHT.

  14. #39
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Augusta, Georgia, United States
    Posts
    4,182
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Goes to show how much anyone who matters cares about opinions here no matter how rude they are. If you don't embrace changes that you may not agree with you will become obsolete. I guess that doesn't matter for some because they already are though…
    The only code I hate more than my own is everyone else's.

  15. #40
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by oddz
    If you don't embrace changes that you may not agree with you will become obsolete.
    Some of these prefixes are simply added to the webkit rendering engine without any mention to the Working Groups or anyone else, and sometimes without documentation. And webkit trying out a property without proposing it to the spec writers doesn't mean everyone else should run out and try to reverse engineer it. What a waste of developer time. Those prefixes were there for a reason. Unfortunately they were released to the general developer public and then of course abused because that's what the masses do to things. Makes me sound like an elitist but I'm so pissed right now...

    Quote Originally Posted by bruce lawson
    The most common complaint we got was about sites that had, say, white text on a graient background. The gradient had only -webkit- prefixing and there was no fallback background-color. This meant many buttons etc were white text on a white background. You might call that a "less elegant experience for users of non-webkit browsers"; our customers called it "a broken website in Opera".
    Why am I hearing ol' FrankenSteve screaming DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! ?

  16. #41
    Community Advisor silver trophybronze trophy
    dresden_phoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    2,813
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Unfortunately they were released to the general developer public and then of course abused because that's what the masses do to things. Makes me sound like an elitist but I'm so pissed right now...
    I agree, but disagree in the chain of events. The prefixes were there to allow vendors to begin/test development of their REs ( this is obvious), in order to do so 'bleeding edge' designers will make demos ( I remember the webkit at-at animation fondly), those demos will be seen by a mix of 10% web designers and 90% clients looking for web designers ( they of course don't wanna pay someone who's is elite) . So they ask regular web designers (or ask their HR depts. to ask their developer candidates) if they can do this(showing prefix-based demos) ... some say no, some are honest and say they cant but that they would advice against it because... ( reasoning follows) and some merely start to use prefixes ( sometimes w/o even using or researching other vendors, in other words what ever UA did it first must be the only one to develop for). Well, the first group is labeled "behind the times" the next group is labeled "difficult to work with, stubborn and chasing some impractical NERD thing called 'standards' , and the last group gets $$.

    Guess which groups grows.

    So it's really not developers as client demand which mus t be altered. I am sure that conscientious developer saw the webtkit animations 3 or 4 years ago.. and thought it was neat; toyed with it, to be ready when it was broad support; but did not offer it as a service... until some client said.. "I am looking for someone who can do this for me :: shows demo page::" ( see sequence above).

    five or six years ago if you could incorporate rounded corners and drop shadows into a CSS design you 'knew your stuff' AND CLIENTS would be ambivalent about CSS, not because of cross browser support or semantics... but because 'it LOOKED blocky') Consequently he had a border-radius and box-shadow be one of the first thing "released" to the general public. Now every 13year old can claim to do an 'awesome' Myspace like web design, by default.

    I hate to say it, but if a feature is in a public release UA... then it is already " working towards" standards. Not the ones we were envisioning, maybe, but at that point they become part of the immutable web landscape. Recall that IE was the first to support CSS, and there were only two vendors to deal with in those days. Turns out that being first is not always being best .. or even right. But later IE could not/ would not change to support standards for fear of "breaking the web". So, would it have been preferable for no CSS to be used UNTIL every vendor got on board?


    The solution back then ( and there were only two or three browsers to contend with) was HACKs and/or conditional comments. To be honest, I like vendor prefixing because it avoids BOTH. Or was supposed to anyhow. Without prefixing, all development would have to be lowest common denominator. I honestly felt, the first time I saw prefixing that included a SET of vendors for the same declaration ) That it was a great stride to ward standards.. and toward support of UAs that would eventually become the 'legacy' UAs once all vendors adopted standards and prefixes could be dropped for the sake of brevity. Tell me this doesn't beat the clever, but unstable, *hack?

    It's a rule of nature. Support will always be stratified. Someone will be first t offer a feature and other will follow. In some cases the feature will be right from the start, in other it will develop to be more powerful and complex, and in others it will be radically different.

    But no one is ever happy. Now that we can do effect with pure CSS and with less non-semantic hooks... and with 100% knowledge that it will be supported in the TARGETED UA w/o affecting other UAs then the complaint is... "all these" vendors... "Hey I got it... let's tell everyone to JUST USE 'webkit' so we wont have to type twice." Besides, the point is to design for graceful degradation. It the client request was for a CSS-only animated web cartoon.. then the request itself was the problem.

    I will admit, that the whole prefix thing harms the "one web one way" goal, but I am sure once the dust settles we will return to that path again.. with far less clean up than was needed for old IE.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •