What is the basic difference between -moz-linear-gradient and -webkit-gradient. I know the changes are in parameters and -moz is meant for mozilla. But why we have different CSS property for Mozilla. What does webkit represents here ?
Most often, though, the extensions are used to release and test
browser features that have been developed in the preparation of W3C
drafts that have not yet reached Candidate Recommendation status—the
extensions allow these new properties to be widely tested before they
become available as standard CSS properties.
http://reference.sitepoint.com/css/vendorspecific
Some of these properties have been included in draft CSS specification
for inclusion in the final recommendation, but are still experimental.
The final standard property may be different from the current prefix
implementation.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Reference/Mozilla_Extensions
Webkit CSS properties
http://css-infos.net/properties/webkit
WebKit is an open source web browser engine. WebKit is also the name of the Mac OS X system framework version of the engine that's used by Safari, Dashboard, Mail, and many other OS X applications. WebKit's HTML and JavaScript code began as a branch of the KHTML and KJS libraries from KDE.
CSS3 Gradients
Introduction
WebKit paved the way for gradients in CSS by adding support for -webkit-gradient back in early 2008, and they’ve become widely used since their introduction.
Over the past several months, the CSS Working Group has had extended discussions about making the gradient syntax easier to use, and recently Tab Atkins included a proposal in the latest draft of the Image Values and Replaced Content module. WebKit and Mozilla have now implemented this proposal so that web authors can experiment with it, and provide feedback to the Working Group. Note that the proposal is still an editor’s draft, which means that it’s still possible, and even likely to change due to user feedback.
The main goal of the new syntax is simplicity; it’s now really easy to code up common gradients, as you’ll see in the examples below. A secondary goal was to specify something where implementations were compatible across browsers.
If you’re not already running one, go and grab a recent nightly build so that you can see the examples in this post.
Here are some simple examples (note that all these examples are resizable, so you can see how resizing the box affects the gradients):
Related
I've been using -webkit and -moz for quite a few times now until this struck me. Aside from defining specific properties based on browsers and certain properties such as break-inside which are not widely supported,
Wouldn't
border-radius: 5px;
makes it shorter for
-moz-border-radius: 5px;
-webkit-border-radius: 5px;
border-radius: 5px;
There are lots of other features which have been standardized but several examples still utilize the vendor prefixes and what are their purposes for doing so?
The former is supported by latest browsers but can we not assume almost everybody is using almost-latest browsers (especially NOT older versions of IE which certain rules apply)? (Even if people do not update their browsers, they are only left behind by just a few versions considering no one takes out a Nokia-old phone from a chest and started browsing)
Why should we use them? Why should we specify older IE specific rules or just older browser rules?
How much diving into older version would be enough? IE8?
Here are my thoughts - before going into detail I have to say that I am a freak when it comes to browser support.
Up until a couple of years back I was trying to support from IE8 and upwards. The reason behind this logic was that people where "trapped" with Windows XP and IE8 was the latest version supported by Windows XP. By trapped I mean that they were cases like government pcs that were too costly to upgrade.
After Windows 7 has matured enough and Windows XP usage dropped, I tried to support IE9 and upwards. This essentially meant that even after useful properties came out (like flexbox) it took me a long time to migrate - so I was building layouts with tables for best browser support, etc.
However, Javascript Frameworks started dropping support for older browsers (including IE9), then CSS frameworks started dropping support. If you consider it for a while, MS itself has dropped support quite some time back. Major mobile companies drop support for their 2-year devices, so why should we support older browsers? As stated in in other answers, it depends on the audience - imagine the CEO of your best client-company having a laptop with Windows XP or other outdated device - wouldn't matter if anyone else used modern browsers..
So, it came down to a point a couple of years back that you have to select between following the stream and being modern or supporting older devices. I am all up for consistency and uniformity of content, so supporting modern features for a few select browsers and dropping them for others would be a no go for me. Flexbox was one of those properties that pushed me to skip older browser support - it vastly helped me reduced markup - thus making maintenance easier. At the same time, even Bootstrap decided to drop support for older browsers, so, must upgrade to keep pace with the competition.
Needless to say, the problem isn't just IE, but was also Android which took up to v4.4 in order for the stock browser to support specific properties - vh, flexbox wrapping, etc
These said, let me give you a straight answer:
Don't bother with support for IE9 - not even 10. IE10 could be upgraded to 11 on the same OS, so it should be upgraded anyway for security reasons. IE9 is not supported by JS frameworks (eg Ember), lacks CSS3 transitions and other useful properties, like flexbox. Without these your designs would have to take many steps back if you were aiming for design consistency.
As a sidenote IE10 started supporting their own interpretation of flexbox (sorry about all this persistence with flexbox, but it's one of the most useful properties). This means, that in order to support it properly, you would have to write a lot of CSS. Imagine adding 30kb of minified CSS to support just one browser that is fairly uncommon. Is it worth it?
Some webkit browsers (like Opera) might still require vendor-specific prefixes for browser versions released 4 years ago -eg for CSS3 transforms. Tbh more important things are broken on such browsers (Opera included) that I would worry about other stuff more. Personally I only use the -webkit- prefix in select cases (eg flexbox properties that have matured quite lately).
There might be some cases where browser-specific prefixes might come handy even in modern browsers, eg styling a range input or a scrollbar where you have to mess with browser-specific properties to achieve consistency. In such cases specific CSS hacks with vendor prefixes might be required.
As a final note, I would avoid any bleeding-edge properties, eg grid; learn what it does and how it works, but don't use it just yet. You should give a look at https://caniuse.com/ in order to have an idea about CSS properties and browser support.
However, it is up to you to decide and you should make your selection based on the requirements of your project. Two years back I would tell you to support as old as you can... back then you would be able to achieve the same things with different effort, but this is not the case any more. From a point onwards... older browsers can't keep pace.
Well... This is a really big topic so its hard to answer all of it but there are best practices that you should/could follow.
First - Everything is based on YOUR SPECIFIC Audience. Look at your analytics and see what browsers are being used. The data might surprise you especially if you have US Health care or government users. Tools like Stylelint will help you find unsupported rules in your CSS.
Next, It's best practice to utilize feature detection instead of targeting specific browsers. You can implement that by using #supports in conditional code that works like a media query. This way your code is only being applied if the browser can use it. You can do similar detection in javascript using Modernizr.
Finally, I personally recommend using a CSS post processor or build script so you can stop worrying about prefixing (plus it will speed up your development with optional plugins). I tend to like a combo of PostCSS and Prefixfree (several Webpack customizations come with those included) but there are many similar options.
The main benefit is that the library tracks what needs prefixes and what doesn't so you write the non-prefixed version and the rest is taken care of.
There are no hard and fast rules but you should try to support your users' devices instead of pushing for upgrades. The nice thing about the above practices is that your resulting code will be easier to maintain, future proof and targeted to your users.
You should not worry about browsers older than IE 8. These browsers are barely used anymore and they do not support a lot of things. Please, refer to these to websites:
https://imagebox.com/industry/why-your-website-doesnt-look-the-same-in-every-browser/
http://dowebsitesneedtolookexactlythesameineverybrowser.com/.
In terms of the various border-radius commands, make sure to use them all. I've found that if you don't include webkit and mozilla, you lose a lot of traffic. In my website, I usually include every variation of a command so I know for sure my website works. Better to have a large and ugly CSS code than a broken website.
Feel free to comment on this answer if you need more clarification.
I have two issues I have ignored so far, but I will really appreciate some light shed onto them.
First: how can I solve differences between Safari, Chrome and Firefox and the various tags that their engines render differently? Should I just write down the right attribute for each in the same css rule? Is there no better way?
Is there a way to separate the CSS sheets for these browsers as I am doing for IE? Is this recommended?
Second: What about CSS3 attributes? Should I just write them again in the same rule after the CSS2 attributes?
Will this cause problems validating the CSS with WC3?
Welcome :)
If you start without the prefixes, you should write the code, generally, with all the semantically appropriate tags, first.
Then, you can decide what your goals are.
If you want W3C compliant CSS files, then you'd need to strip out the vendor specific prefixes by default. This would then allow the latest browsers to pick up the standardised CSS properties if they support them.
This will target less of your market than you might wish, so then you should ask if progressive enhancement is a possibility. If you can reasonably enhance the visuals by using css applied after the page has loaded, such as applying styles with jQuery, MooTools or Prototype libraries AND these libraries are already serving a purpose in your website, then you could apply additional styles with those libraries (and possibly use them in conjunction with Modernizr to determine which elements you may want to additionally support.
However, it's likely that a browser will skip a property it doesn't understand and will render the ones that it does, so I'd suggest that if you code it to W3C Standards first and then add in your additional vendor prefixes 'before' the final (correct) one, then you'll likely have satisfied reasonable measures to be compliant and meet design needs.
Edit:
There is a little bit of confusion between validation results from:
http://validator.w3.org/
and writing valid code related to vendor prefixes to get CSS effects cross-browser:
List of CSS vendor prefixes?
for working on some cross-browser CSS, you might find http://csspie.com, for IE compatibility with some CSS3 properties, useful along with http://www.colorzilla.com/gradient-editor/ for cross-browser gradients and http://cssplease.com for code that gives you alternative vendor prefixes, including different versions of IE support for many different properties.
In terms of validation, here's what W3C says about it: (see comments here: W3 VALID cross browser css gradient,) and official docs here: http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-syntax/#vendor-specific
If you code according to the specifications first and test your code out against that and then add in your vendor prefixes to get the same effects on the browsers you want to support (see progressive enhancement: What is Progressive Enhancement?) then you can be more confident that your code is supporting the appropriate standards, adding value to those with more advanced browsers and still useful for those without additional features (see also WAI III compliance, 508 compliance and others if you want to write a more inclusive site).
Caveat: Web Apps may not always be inclusive or follow these guidelines depending on who the audience is.
If you are using jquery on the site you may want to look into PrefixFree. It's a script that adds the vendor prefixes for you, so for example your put border-radius:6px; in yor css and it reads the browser and adds the appropriate vendor prefix for you via js. I like it cause it keeps my css docs more readable.
Similar to disabling JavaScript in browsers, is there a way to disable support for various CSS3 properties in Firefox or Chrome to quickly confirm a page is rendering OK if support for certain properties isn't there? I know it's only a presentation layer, but I'm just hoping there's a more efficient way to test against this without using old browsers, especially if Modernizr is being utilised.
A project called deCSS3 manages to disable a large majority of CSS3 properties through the use of a bookmarklet that overrides and neutralises their usage with !important rules.
A recent addition to the project is "Modernizr class toggling" for an added level of testing when Modernizr is utilised.
Even if there were a way to do so, would it help? Each browser has its own quirks, so there is no guarantee that e.g.:
Firefox - CSS3 = Older Browser
CSS3 isn't a set of additions to CSS2, it replaces CSS2. The backgrounds and borders module in CSS3 includes border and background as well as border-radius and box-shadow. If you 'turn off' CSS3 you turn off all CSS, and even if you could disable the new stuff Tom's answer is correct - that wouldn't leave you testing anything that actually exists in the real world.
If you need a way to "turn off CSS3" then I don't think you're thinking about/implementing progressive enhancement/graceful degradation properly. You should be starting with non-CSS3 stuff, then enhancing your site with it. When you build the non-CSS3 foundation and test it in your target browsers, then adding CSS3 shouldn't change anything (browsers ignore styles they don't recognize). If you sandbox your CSS3 in its own stylesheet, then you can tell old versions of IE to completely ignore it (or, if you're using stuff that's only partially supported in IE9, can tell all versions of IE to ignore it) to save a download.
That said, CSS is handled by the core rendering engine, so in order to view a page without CSS3, you have to view it in a browser that doesn't support CSS3. It sucks, it means you have to have several browsers, and even virtual machines (or physical machines) to test very well, but such is the state of web development, unfortunately. Theoretically, you should be testing in several browsers, anyway, and already know that IE6-8 have their own quirks that don't even relate to CSS3, and should already be set up to test them (so, therefore, if you need to test old versions of other browsers, you can install them in your IE test environment).
There's a useful add-on for Firefox called "User Agent Switcher" which allows you to bump your browser rendering down to an older version of IE (the iPhone rendering is also pretty useful). That should help you double check.
How do I find the version of CSS that I am using?
Although the CSS specification is defined in several versions (v2, 2.1, 3), the CSS version isn't really relevant to the developer; you need to be more concerned with which web browsers support a given feature.
It is useful to know that a given feature was defined in CSS2, 2.1 or 3 because that can give you an idea of how old the feature is, and therefore how likely it is that browsers will support it -- for example border-radius is a CSS3 feature, so browsers more than a couple of years old may not support it fully.
You can find out what CSS features are supported in which browsers from the following sites:
http://www.quirksmode.org/css/contents.html
http://caniuse.com/
The version is only defined by the CSS selectors, propreties and attributes that you use.
You are free to mix elements of CSS 1, 2 and 3 in any styles that you write.
You can refer to the CSS specifications to see more details. The specifications and drafts at the W3C is available via this index: http://www.w3schools.com/w3c/w3c_css.asp
Just an addition of what #Craig said.
In my .net 2.0 framework I have a property to show scroll bars. As I want just the vertical, I've added both properties and, if the browser that user is using support this new CSS 3.0 property (overflow-x), he will see just the vertical one.
In my opinion you should use object detection instead - check the MDC to understand the principle.
On Internet Explorer you might find compatMode and documentMode useful.
As far as I know, there's nothing in CSS code that specifies the version. Browsers are designed to interpret one or more versions of CSS at runtime. Therefore, I would imagine that you would need to get the version of the browser via javascript and then determine what version of CSS is understood by the browser.
As of right now I believe only Firefox support -moz-border-radius property. I am surprised that twitter uses it.
Are any other browsers planning on supporting this or does CSS3 have something like this in the works?
Edit: I also found -webkit-border-top-left-radius and then the CSS3 version
So when is CSS3 coming out?
CSS3 has border-radius.
For now, Mozilla- and WebKit-based browsers have experimental support, -moz-border-radius and -webkit-border-radius. It's not bad to use them now, as long as you understand they are temporary measures until they are properly implemented. I would expect it's not too long before you see full support for border-radius in Mozilla, Firefox and IE. (Well, hopefully IE.)
Update: as of August 2016, with border-radius being natively available in all native desktop browsers (and most mobile browsers, not to mention), the stringency of using -moz-border-radius, -webkit-border-radius and similar is being slowly relaxed.
Because the CSS3 spec hasn't been finalised, Mozilla and Webkit decided to implement their own method of rounded corners, doing it in the correct way, by adding the vendor-specific tag at the front.
This is done so that when the CSS3 is FINALLY released, should they change how border-radius is supposed to work (eg: the order of the parameters), then none of the sites using the vendor-specific methods will be broken. Mozilla and WebKit can just go ahead and implement the W3C style and developers can slowly move over to that.
It's not too surprising that you're seeing some websites using it, especially for something like rounded corners where it's not going to make a massive difference to the user experience. And I mean, it's just IE users who are missing out, and they deserve everything they get.
It bugs me when people talk about CSS3 coming out. It's not a complete spec like the previous ones. It has been broken up into separate modules that may increment their versions independently.
So Selectors Level 4 may make Recommendation before CSS Backgrounds and Borders Level 3 does.
So, will CSS3 arrive? Eventually, but not all a once. So don't wait for it, start using it now (where applicable).
CSS3 has something like this in the works.
According to this, IE 8 will not support border-radius.
Any CSS property that starts with a dash (e.g. -moz, -webkit) is a browser-specific property.
This allows browser vendors to experiment with new CSS properties. Doing so is a common part of the process for writing new CSS specs, to allow web developers to see how the properties work and raise issues.
Hence you’ll find a lot of CSS 3 properties, like border-radius currently implemented in some browsers with vendor-specific extensions.
There’s nothing particularly wrong with using these on production sites, as long as you’re aware they’ll only work in the one browser.
CSS 3 should be out any decade now :)
Browser-based properties are only meant for interim fixes for that particular browser, and are supposed to be deprecated when either the W3C adopts them into CSS, or not. I wouldn't rely on them to be cross-browser or even be kept for the particular browser.