Dan Tonon

It would be a nice to have but not essential. I find it much easier to use grid areas instead.

This comment on the css-working-group issue tracker gave an interesting use case https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2270#issuecomment-388222647 ````css .grid { grid-template-rows: [start] repeat(2, repeat(2, repeat(3, minmax(0,1fr) [small]) [medium]) [large] [half]) [end]; } .small {...

If this was implemented then it would have the same issue as grid areas in that every line name would need to be unique in order for Autoprefixer to tell...

As mentioned in #1155, there is a use case for line names in having an easy-ish way to have grid areas overlap one another. ```css .grid { grid-template-columns: [a-start] 1fr...

Autoprefixer should detect caniuse data for the `gap` property and `display: grid` If the browser does not support `display: grid` then prefixing is not required. If the browser supports `gap`...

What harm does it do to include support for this? This is essentially a standardised vendor prefix. There isn't really much difference between this and something like `-webkit-something`. Adding support...

I guess a warning is better than nothing. It at least gives users direction in terms of what they should do for the best browser support.

Yeah basically. If `gap` is found but not `grid-gap`, and there are browsers on the browserslist config that support `grid-gap` but not `gap` then produce a warning that directs users...

@fschoenfeldt if you are only using it for CSS grid it is maybe not worth writing the `gap` version at all since `grid-gap` works everywhere that `gap` does but `gap`...

You can do "or" in Browserslist? A config like this: ``` last 10 version not dead ``` Equates to `last 10 version` **and** `not dead`. That's not a bug, that's...