En 10/02/14 21:55, Maciej Stachowiak escribiu: >> The question is whether this is an acceptable behavior or not, and how >> to fix it in case we don't like it. I guess it's safe to conclude that >> it isn't something that we want in general, as it might confuse web >> authors (they see the how properties are available but do nothing). >> Regarding how to fix it, I guess the idea is to do something similar to >> what Eric did in Blink last year[2], i.e., filtering out the list of >> properties that are runtime disabled. > > It's not a good behavior, in my opinion. I am not an expert on the CSS > parser, but I think we should hide the CSS interface for runtime-disabled > features. That would allow us to consider runtime disabling instead of > prefixing as a tool for early testing in more cases.
Not sure why you mention the parser here, but as I mentioned in my email, the parser currently rejects those properties associated to runtime disabled features. The problem is that, even in those cases we're exposing them to the JS world. In any case I totally agree with you that runtime disabling can be a nice replacement of prefixed properties. BR _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
