On Thursday 2017-02-16 13:20 -0500, Benjamin Smedberg wrote: > I'm surprised and disheartened that "land it and see what breaks" is > considered an acceptable strategy for pretty much any commit, but > especially for web compat.
I don't think this is a realistic argument. Basically any change we make to Gecko, including implementing new features, can affect Web compat. We have to use judgment about which ones require measuring. > We *know* that -moz-appearance: none has long been a webdev technique used > to unstyle various form controls [1][2][3][4]. We can also presume that > sometimes people sniff and hand us different markup than other browsers. So > we can't simply use data about what other engines have shipped to reason > about how changes to our own engine will affect site behavior and layout. This is a good argument that some measuring is needed in this case. > In this case, I understand the advantage of shipping CSS 'appearance'. I'm > less sure about what it would cost us to keep supporting -moz-appearance: > none, perhaps indefinitely. The cost is long-term or permanent differences between rendering engines, which leads to extra work for Web developers and to Web-compatibility problems for us. -David -- π L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ π π’ Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ π Before I built a wall I'd ask to know What I was walling in or walling out, And to whom I was like to give offense. - Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
