You will be able to use them without those prefixes as soon as the W3C agrees on the final implementation of a standard and as soon as the respective browser implements said standard perfectly.
Browser prefixes are actually a great idea that save us from the madness of the old days (like browser hacks) and there is nothing bad about them.
Isn't the reason for the vendor tags that the features aren't part of the official spec? I'd guess the answer would be once they become official or you start generating your CSS. Doesn't even have to be that fancy, just something to run over a css file and duplicate a declaration a few times in all the different formats.
Probably something you should look into, I don't expect there to come a point where vendors stop adding new proprietary properties, at least not this decade.
Those properties are not proprietary (the vast majority at least). There is a draft spec for most of them but agreement on the final implementation doesn't yet exist. Browser prefixes give vendors the ability to test said draft spec in the wild and correct course if necessary. They also make sure that differing implementations don't make the lives of web developers hard for decades. They are a great idea, actually.
I guess proprietary was the wrong word for what I was saying about the properties. It wasn't my aim to imply that they were proprietary features, just a lack of knowing a better term to refer to the property names.
Comments
When will I be able to use the latest CSS and HTML features without vendor tags in any browser? I'm tired of -wekbit -moz -o and -ms.
I won't count any of them as supporting stuff until it works without vendor extensions, and I can finally stop saying things in quadruplicate.
You will be able to use them without those prefixes as soon as the W3C agrees on the final implementation of a standard and as soon as the respective browser implements said standard perfectly.
Browser prefixes are actually a great idea that save us from the madness of the old days (like browser hacks) and there is nothing bad about them.
Isn't the reason for the vendor tags that the features aren't part of the official spec? I'd guess the answer would be once they become official or you start generating your CSS. Doesn't even have to be that fancy, just something to run over a css file and duplicate a declaration a few times in all the different formats.
Probably something you should look into, I don't expect there to come a point where vendors stop adding new proprietary properties, at least not this decade.
Those properties are not proprietary (the vast majority at least). There is a draft spec for most of them but agreement on the final implementation doesn't yet exist. Browser prefixes give vendors the ability to test said draft spec in the wild and correct course if necessary. They also make sure that differing implementations don't make the lives of web developers hard for decades. They are a great idea, actually.
I guess proprietary was the wrong word for what I was saying about the properties. It wasn't my aim to imply that they were proprietary features, just a lack of knowing a better term to refer to the property names.