News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Apple & HTML5. Parent comment

Re:Apple & HTML5 by bradgessler on Friday June 04, 2010 @02:11AM (#1403641)
A poignant example is all of the non-standard -webkit CSS extensions Apple uses for the Gallery demo (http://www.apple.com/html5/showcase/gallery/):

   #gallery-demo .grid2d figure:nth-child(5)  { -webkit-transform: translateX(-241px) translateY(-3px) scale(.45) translateZ(1000px);}
If you accept -webkit CSS extensions as a standard, then Internet Explorer has supported the CSS opacity attribute for years:

   filter: progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.Alpha(Opacity=80);
These extensions are not part of the CSS3 or HTML5 spec.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple & HTML5 by mikedouglas on Friday June 04, 2010 @02:31AM (#1403668)
Actually, transform is in the CSS3 working spec[0]. Until the standard reaches the "Candidate Recommendation" stage, the W3C encourages browser vendors to use prefixes (-webkit, -moz, etc).

DXImageTransform.Microsoft.Alpha, on the other hand, wouldn't be part of CSS3, and uses its own specific syntax.

[0]: http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-3d-transforms/#transform-property

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple & HTML5 by statictype on Friday June 04, 2010 @12:27PM (#1404748)
Is there any technical reason why using webkit's browser specific css attribute and firefox's browser specific css attribute is any better than using IE's browser specific css attribute?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple & HTML5 by pornel on Friday June 04, 2010 @03:10PM (#1405297)
`filter:` syntax isn't compatible with CSS tokenizer (IE<8 is unparseable without special tokenizer state set by the parser, IE8 uses non-CSS syntax in CSS string).

IE's transform filter uses only matrix, which scares the hell out of designers.

[ Parent | on HN ]