As @quoid has described in above issue, the extension's legacy ==UserStyle== implementation was more of a source of confusion and frustration for users with invalid attempts.
So the best thing to do would be to remove these terms and eliminate those references that cause confusion, especially when we never intend to achieve standardization and compatibility.
We'll probably keep reading .user.css files for a while to preserve compatibility for our historical users, but maybe add a deprecation notice, or provide a one-click conversion feature to convert them to user scripts.
For any new users, and those who are wondering:
We have never supported UserCSS/UserStyles based on the @moz-document syntax.
We have never supported style formats written for extensions such as Stylus/Stylish etc.
We recommend using user scripts and the GM.addStyle(css) API to inject style/css code.
We recommend using userscript's @match metadata and js conditional statements to limit css scope.
As @quoid has described in above issue, the extension's legacy
==UserStyle==implementation was more of a source of confusion and frustration for users with invalid attempts.So the best thing to do would be to remove these terms and eliminate those references that cause confusion, especially when we never intend to achieve standardization and compatibility.
We'll probably keep reading
.user.cssfiles for a while to preserve compatibility for our historical users, but maybe add a deprecation notice, or provide a one-click conversion feature to convert them to user scripts.For any new users, and those who are wondering:
@moz-documentsyntax.GM.addStyle(css)API to inject style/css code.@matchmetadata and js conditional statements to limit css scope.