On 2/16/17 6:54 PM, Mats Palmgren wrote:
I don't think removing -moz-appearance even has the potential of being "critical". All that happens is that you get native styling instead (at worst). There shouldn't be any loss of function.
That depends. It's not hard to come up with examples where doing that means you can't read any of the labels on the buttons you're supposed to click.
I thought about this a fair bit the last few days, and I think it would be a mistake to tie shipping appearance/-webkit-appearance to the removal of -moz-appearance. We should ship the no-prefix version and the -webkit version. Then we should get people to switch to them. Then we can remove -moz-appearance.
I suspect this is the case for -moz-appearance. If the web author also wrote -webkit-appearance/appearance:none (as they should)
I'm 99% sure there are pages (including some produced by Google and Facebook, last I checked) that do server-side sniffing and send only -moz-appearance to Firefox and only -webkit-appearance to Chrome and "appearance" to no one at all.
AFAICT, IE11 (on a Win7 desktop) has no support for 'appearance' at all (or any prefixed variant thereof), and Edge specifically added support only for '-webkit-appearance:none'. And I assume the web still works in those browsers.
Edge also has a UA string that sniffs as "Chrome" unless you very carefully try to disambiguate. This is not an accident.
-Boris _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
