Last Comment Bug 879119 - Drop support for -moz-prefixes from cursor: zoom-in | zoom-out | grab | grabbing
: Drop support for -moz-prefixes from cursor: zoom-in | zoom-out | grab | grabbing
Status: NEW
: addon-compat, dev-doc-needed, site-compat
Product: Core
Classification: Components
Component: CSS Parsing and Computation (show other bugs)
: Trunk
: All All
-- normal with 2 votes (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody; OK to take it and work on it
: Jet Villegas (:jet)
Depends on:
Blocks: unprefix 772153 880672
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2013-06-03 19:46 PDT by j.j.
Modified: 2016-12-20 15:14 PST (History)
7 users (show)
wisniewskit: needinfo? (cam)
See Also:
Crash Signature:
QA Whiteboard:
Iteration: ---
Points: ---
Has Regression Range: ---
Has STR: ---

879119-remove_support_for_moz-prefixed_cursor_values.diff (5.88 KB, patch)
2016-11-24 15:54 PST, Thomas Wisniewski
cam: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review

Description User image j.j. 2013-06-03 19:46:28 PDT
Bug 772153 added support for unprefixed cursor: zoom-in | zoom-out (Fx24).
Support for -moz-prefixes should be dropped after
<inset-arbitrary-number-here> releases.
Comment 1 User image Merih Akar 2014-02-09 16:16:04 PST
Unprefixed grab | grabbing are implemented in Bug 880672 (Firefox 27).

Besides, shouldn't bugs 772153 and 880672 be blocking this issue rather than is blocked by this?

Lastly, most web authors supply a fallback image or unprefixed zoom-in | zoom-out | grab | grabbing as a value for the cursor, so I think "<inset-arbitrary-number-here>" does not need to be a big number.
Comment 2 User image Kohei Yoshino [:kohei] 2015-10-27 19:07:36 PDT
Posted the site compatibility doc:
Comment 3 User image Thomas Wisniewski 2016-09-09 06:42:08 PDT
I note that there are still active themes/addons on DXR which only use the -moz variant of these properties, some of which are still kept up-to-date. Is it worth removing the prefixed variants regardless, given the time it has been since the unprefixed versions (and deprecation notice) were issued?
Comment 4 User image j.j. 2016-09-12 07:42:45 PDT
(In reply to Thomas Wisniewski from comment #3)

> Is it worth removing the prefixed variants


Blink woudn't drop any -webkit-prefix if they asked that question
Comment 5 User image Thomas Wisniewski 2016-09-12 07:48:00 PDT
Of course :)

But is it worth removing them *now*?
Comment 6 User image Thomas Wisniewski 2016-11-24 15:54:49 PST
Created attachment 8814260 [details] [diff] [review]

In the interests of moving this forward, here's a patch that removes the moz-prefixed cursors.

Try seems fine with it (discounting the scary-looking unrelated oranges there):

I can also file an intent to unship on dev.platform, since I think that's standard procedure for any such removals?
Comment 7 User image Cameron McCormack (:heycam) (away 25 Feb–5 Mar) 2016-11-24 22:11:37 PST
(In reply to Thomas Wisniewski from comment #6)
> I can also file an intent to unship on dev.platform, since I think that's
> standard procedure for any such removals?

Yes, I think that would be a great idea.  Is there a way you can determine the number of users of the addons that mention these cursor property values?  Searching for moz-zoom-in on DXR, it looks like nearly all uses are just setting that property, and so any breakage would be limited to the cursor not looking right, which is pretty minimal.  If you can determine that any of the addons have a lot of users, you could contact the authors to prompt them to update.
Comment 8 User image Cameron McCormack (:heycam) (away 25 Feb–5 Mar) 2016-11-24 22:14:16 PST
Comment on attachment 8814260 [details] [diff] [review]

Review of attachment 8814260 [details] [diff] [review]:

r=me though I'd probably wait until after you give a week or so after sending the intent email to see if you get any pushback.

::: layout/style/nsCSSProps.cpp
@@ +1269,5 @@
>    { eCSSKeyword_grab, NS_STYLE_CURSOR_GRAB },
>    { eCSSKeyword_grabbing, NS_STYLE_CURSOR_GRABBING },
>    { eCSSKeyword_zoom_in, NS_STYLE_CURSOR_ZOOM_IN },
>    { eCSSKeyword_zoom_out, NS_STYLE_CURSOR_ZOOM_OUT },
>    // -moz- prefixed vendor specific

You can remove this comment.
Comment 9 User image Thomas Wisniewski 2016-11-25 07:27:04 PST
Intent to unship has been sent:!topic/

I'll try to study DXR soon to see who to outreach.
Comment 10 User image Thomas Wisniewski 2016-12-19 17:09:59 PST
I haven't received any feedback on the intent to unship yet, so I'll try to do some DXR-hunting soon so we can land this removal.
Comment 11 User image Thomas Wisniewski 2016-12-19 21:38:03 PST
Alright, here's a list of addons I found on DXR which use -moz-zoom-(in|out) or -moz-grab(bing), but not the standard version:

Also, Firebug will have to decide which versions they want to update (if any).

The defunct CoolPreviews addon seems to still have quite a few users as well, with quite a few variants and clones in DXR that don't seem to be on AMO. I'm not sure whether we can reach out to all of those users, but I could do another DXR search for those addons if we'd like to try.

There were also a few Chrome extensions that multiple users seem to have "Foxified", which we might want to reach out to as well:
- Plus for Trello
- OCRNow for FENXT
- Black Menu for Google

I can try to whittle this list down to just the most popular addons, but I'm not sure what the best course of action is for this sort of thing. Is there anyone on the addons team I should speak with about this, heycam?

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.