Unnessary Vendor prefixes

[karlo]

Hi,
Not much to say, still in ??? mode, but just a few things I stumbled over. This is a pretty sad first post but I hate vendor prefixes and I think JS has some that can be removed.

-moz-border-radius – https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/CSS/border-radius
-moz-box-shadow – https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/CSS/box-shadow

can be removed unless you want to support unsupported Mozilla browsers, since 6 months: https://twitter.com/paulrouget/statuses/200513487896707072 which you actually might want to. But if not they can go. Firefox 4+ do not need.

Can also be seen here http://css3please.com/

And

-ms-linear-gradient
-ms-transition

plus much more I don’t think you use, are no longer needed. IE9 does not support and IE10 work wiith no vendor prefix http://www.impressivewebs.com/dropping-ms-vendor-prefixes-ie10/

http://caniuse.com/ is probably the best resource for this.

Twitter Bootstrap seem to have removed MS stuff but not yet deprecated -moz stuff. Does not make much sense as they do not support old Firefox https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/wiki/Browser-Compatibility and newer, 4+, don’t even use prefix.

Excuse me for being pedantic, “sigh” worthy! Has of course no impact on JS but details matters. Especially with prefixes.

Btw, ??? mode does not mean I am lost in JS. Well I am a bit but in a weeee, nomnom type of ??? way 🙂

Topic

[Jason Bobich]

Hello,

Thanks for the feedback.

I suppose you’re right about the -ms properties. They could probably be removed in the future but for no other reason than they don’t “need” to be there. It’s not as if there is any harm in having them in there, especially now while IE10 is still going through changes. I think this should definitely wait until after IE10 is actually stable, released, and being used by everyone. It’s only recently that Microsoft made this decision with IE10 and the -ms properties, right?

And what reason would you have to remove -moz pre-fixed CSS properties other than they aren’t needed any more in modern Firefox browsers? You want to have a few lines less of CSS? You want to pass the CSS3 validator and get the little stamp of approval? Or you just don’t like looking at them? — So, I honestly don’t see the logic in having a theme such as this setup to be backwards-compatible already and then stripping that out for no real practical reason.

[karlo]

Well it is Microsoft them self who declare this http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2012/06/06/moving-the-stable-web-forward-in-ie10-release-preview.aspx and Mozilla. Is official information not my ideas. So “No real practical reasons” is exactly why not to include, not the other way. For as much as it matters it is you who should argue why they are there 🙂

Depends who you ask if you get pad on back or not. You CAN argue not used code should stay if you find the right people. Most sane will go “stupid not to, less is better, about time, weeee” while others like CSS Lint will be the last to remove. Also validators/generators will need to be updated, as impressiveweb hints. Zzzzz. Check ColorZilla for example, nothing happens. Well CSS Lint also have concerns about IE6 usage and do test for it! In fact if you check what they test for it is pretty much impossible to please everyone at the same time. Frustrating/annoying so if there is a chance to simplify CSS, regardless of how little, I vote to take it. Not the same as micro optimization.

But it can be a bit tricky to lean on “authorities”. Like CSS3Please. One of the go to sites for this. Lots of credentials etc. Yep, and they also recently removed “support” for IE8, so all those people who have been told just go there and get your stuff fixed, are now dismissing IE8 with certain things. That is opinionated and I think wrong. So best to be conservative and follow official announcements from vendors – which is why I posted.

[Author]

Replies