Filing this bug to track what needs to be done before we unprefix CSS transforms.

We appear to be inconsistent about using moz-prefixes internally. I think it would probably be good to get rid of them already. (Note that the enum is prefixed for transform / transform-origin, but not for backface-visibility / perspective / perspective-origin / transform-style.)

For later.

Comment on attachment 615160 [details] [diff] [review] Part a: Remove prefixes from functions and enums > -. 'id' should be the same as 'name' except that all hyphens ('-') >- in 'name' are converted to underscores ('_') in 'id'. This lets us >- do nice things with the macros without having to copy/convert strings >- at runtime. These are the names used for the enum values of the >- nsCSSProperty enumeration defined in nsCSSProps.h. >+ in 'name' are converted to underscores ('_') in 'id', and any '-moz-' >+ prefix is removed in 'id'. This lets us do nice things with the >+ macros without having to copy/convert strings at runtime. These are >+ the names used for the enum values of the nsCSSProperty enumeration >+ defined in nsCSSProps.h. I think this should say that *for properties on a standards track*, any '-moz-' prefix is removed in 'id'. I think we probably still want it for things that aren't standards-track at all, although those a relatively rare. But otherwise agreed that we should be avoiding prefixes here. (And we should probably also remove the use of prefixes through nsComputedDOMStyle as well... at least until we get around to bug 264517 which would make the issue moot.)

Comment on attachment 615160 [details] [diff] [review] Part a: Remove prefixes from functions and enums https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/5852f4fd12f8

Transforms were heavily shown as evidence to being a problem in John Jensen's report with top sites. Nominating for kilimanjaro, as this affects many top sites.

Matt: Please review the 4 bugs I added as "blockers." We need to determine if we should fix those issues prior to unprefixing.

Note, the CSS Working Group has agreed to give the go-ahead to browser implementers to unprefix CSS3 Transitions, Transforms, and Animations: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Jun/0105.html

Do we want to keep supporting the -moz- versions for now? If not, we'll need a patch to fix the places where we use those.

(In reply to :Ms2ger from comment #8) > Do we want to keep supporting the -moz- versions for now? If not, we'll need > a patch to fix the places where we use those. For now, yes, though we probably want to go through the tree sooner rather than later. (Better to do the search-and-replace closer to adding support for unprefixed, and then another pass (to fix stuff that was in people's trees or copied) before landing the removal of the prefixed support.)

Comment on attachment 615161 [details] [diff] [review] Part b: Unprefix You're probably going to want to add aliases to nsCSSPropAliasList and nsIDOMCSS2Properties for the prefixed versions, for now. (Probably not for too long, though.)

Comment on attachment 615161 [details] [diff] [review] Part b: Unprefix And I think you're at the very least going to need to update the tests in layout/style/ at the same time as this.

I don't really have time to fix up the whole tree at the moment; can I push that to a followup?

Comment on attachment 636145 [details] [diff] [review] Part b: Unprefix and update tests in layout/style Re-sort the tests in test_transitions_per_property.html and r=dbaron. Sorry for the delay.

Comment on attachment 636145 [details] [diff] [review] Part b: Unprefix and update tests in layout/style And also: >diff --git a/dom/interfaces/css/nsIDOMCSS2Properties.idl b/dom/interfaces/css/nsIDOMCSS2Properties.idl need to rev IID

Comment on attachment 636145 [details] [diff] [review] Part b: Unprefix and update tests in layout/style https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/4004407a1f49

John - Do you have a list of top sites that use -moz-transform? We could probably QA to do a quick pass to make sure nothing looks busted. Jean-Yves - Can you get the MDN doc up to date for transforms? David - If I understand correctly, unprefixing transforms is low risk for regressions, right? Is there anything special a web developer needs to do to migrate from using -moz-transform to the unprefixed version?

May need additional unprefixing in this Layout test: layout/base/tests/test_bug731777.html

> John - Do you have a list of top sites that use -moz-transform? We could probably QA to do a quick pass to make sure nothing looks busted. Sorry about the delay in seeing/replying to this; was on PTO. See attached.

Mention has been added in: https://developer-new.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Firefox_16_for_developers And I've updated: https://developer-new.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/CSS/backface-visibility https://developer-new.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/CSS/perspective https://developer-new.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/CSS/perspective-origin https://developer-new.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/CSS/transform https://developer-new.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/CSS/transform-origin https://developer-new.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/CSS/transform-style https://developer-new.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/CSS/Using_CSS_transforms The expermimental banner will be removed when the spec reach CR. Also this is living on developer-new until Kuma is launched.