On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Jer Noble <jer.no...@apple.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 4, 2013, at 5:00 PM, James Robinson <jam...@google.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Jer Noble <jer.no...@apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Mar 4, 2013, at 4:46 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rn...@webkit.org> wrote: >> >> Could you add either build or runtime flag? >> >> >> I most definitely could. But are there any ports who would disable the >> flag? (Honestly asking, here.) If not, adding a feature flag may be more >> trouble than its worth. >> > As everyone else has already stated, it's a good practice to wrap new features behind a build flag so that we may disable the feature as needed. e.g. your proposal needs to be modified significantly before it can be standardized. It'll be bad if browsers with a faster release cycle (e.g. Chrome) ended up shipping this property while such a discussion is taking place. The general rule of thumb is to have a build flag at least until the specification reaches CR. > In chromium we would like the ability to monitor and, when appropriate, > disable vendor-prefixed non-standard CSS properties. I think it's a bad > idea to assume that by default all ports will want to expose non-standard > API to the web platform without at least considering the situation and > having a plan to remove at least the prefixed version. Please add a flag > and, for bonus points, hook up FeatureObserver so we can monitor usage of > this property. > > > Sure thing. > Thanks! - R. Niwa
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
