One of the things that I noticed about this data is that it has a status key for each property, which can be one of the following values; standard, non-standard, experimental or obsolete. So I thought it might be nice to have a stylelint plugin that could warn a developer that used a non-standard property, hence this plugin.
However what I think I've done is that I've essentially reimplemented http://stylelint.io/user-guide/rules/property-no-unknown/, although the data is a bit richer here (an object of properties with their status as opposed to an array of property strings), we're missing a lot of the non-standard properties that weren't caught by autoprefixer (e.g. zoom).
I don't particularly want to throw away this branch, but I don't think I have the time to reimplement the rest of the non-standard properties; the main reason for implementing this plugin is that it can be updated autonomously. You kind of lose that if you have to do some manual work to support browser-specific properties.
So I'd like to get some feedback; maybe we can merge this effort with the existing property-no-unknown?
One of the things that I noticed about this data is that it has a
statuskey for each property, which can be one of the following values;standard,non-standard,experimentalorobsolete. So I thought it might be nice to have a stylelint plugin that could warn a developer that used anon-standardproperty, hence this plugin.However what I think I've done is that I've essentially reimplemented http://stylelint.io/user-guide/rules/property-no-unknown/, although the data is a bit richer here (an object of properties with their status as opposed to an array of property strings), we're missing a lot of the non-standard properties that weren't caught by autoprefixer (e.g.
zoom).I don't particularly want to throw away this branch, but I don't think I have the time to reimplement the rest of the non-standard properties; the main reason for implementing this plugin is that it can be updated autonomously. You kind of lose that if you have to do some manual work to support browser-specific properties.
So I'd like to get some feedback; maybe we can merge this effort with the existing
property-no-unknown?poke @jeddy3 @davidtheclark