<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Shock! Mozilla specific CSS!</title>
	<link>http://blog.andy-roberts.net/2005/12/26/shock-mozilla-specific-css/</link>
	<description>So you want to know what's going on in my head?</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 07 Sep 2008 19:44:51 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Christian Sonne</title>
		<link>http://blog.andy-roberts.net/2005/12/26/shock-mozilla-specific-css/#comment-5177</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Dec 2006 17:05:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.andy-roberts.net/2005/12/26/shock-mozilla-specific-css/#comment-5177</guid>
					<description>I know this is an old thread, but it *is* ranked fairly high on google, so I thought I'd reply to it anyways...

From CSS2.1, it is possible for a vendor to create vendor-specific (yet still valid) CSS, by prefixing the property with a vendor-prefix:
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#q4

This means that if the IE-developers had just used these prefixes, their IE-specific CSS would have been perfectly valid (in 2.1 that is - not 2.0)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know this is an old thread, but it *is* ranked fairly high on google, so I thought I&#8217;d reply to it anyways&#8230;</p>
<p>From CSS2.1, it is possible for a vendor to create vendor-specific (yet still valid) CSS, by prefixing the property with a vendor-prefix:<br />
<a href='http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#q4' rel='nofollow'>http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#q4</a></p>
<p>This means that if the IE-developers had just used these prefixes, their IE-specific CSS would have been perfectly valid (in 2.1 that is - not 2.0)
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: dadexter</title>
		<link>http://blog.andy-roberts.net/2005/12/26/shock-mozilla-specific-css/#comment-32</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:01:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.andy-roberts.net/2005/12/26/shock-mozilla-specific-css/#comment-32</guid>
					<description>I remember reading a while back that if a browser (like Mozilla) makes an application to have a certain feature part of the standards (like rounded borders), it's the &quot;rule&quot; from the w3c to prefix this feature with a certain prefix like -moz- that identifies it as being proprietary. it's the same with -moz-opacity

Just my 0.02$ CDN</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I remember reading a while back that if a browser (like Mozilla) makes an application to have a certain feature part of the standards (like rounded borders), it&#8217;s the &#8220;rule&#8221; from the w3c to prefix this feature with a certain prefix like -moz- that identifies it as being proprietary. it&#8217;s the same with -moz-opacity</p>
<p>Just my 0.02$ CDN
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
