- From: Domenic Denicola via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 19:05:27 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
FWIW of the meta tags that HTML defines processing models for, the following are the behaviors I see: - `application-name`: - First that matches one of the user's preferred languages based on the `lang=""` attribute. - Does not state how to handle dynamic changes; just gives an algorithm for one-shot determining the application name. - Unclear whether ones inside Shadow DOM are ignored or counted (uses ambiguous "in a Document") - Inside and outside the `head` are treated the same. - `keywords`: - concatenate, split on commas, remove duplicates. - Does not state how to handle dynamic changes. - Very unclear whether ones inside Shadow DOM are ignored or counted. - Inside and outside the `head` are treated the same. - `referrer`: - Last one wins, except unsupported values are ignored and don't overwrite previous, supported values. This is intentional to allow fallback in legacy UAs and the conformance requirements do not prohibit multiple. - Dynamic changes are handled. - Ones inside shadow DOM are ignored. - Ones outside the `head` are ignored. - `theme-color`: - First parseable-as-a-color wins. Conformance requirements prohibit multiple. - Dynamic changes are handled. - Ones inside shadow DOM are ignored. - Inside and outside the `head` are treated the same. It's kind of a mess. We might be able to align some of these but probably not all. If I were to recommend one to follow for this case it would probably be theme-color. -- GitHub Notification of comment by domenic Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3846#issuecomment-577337007 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 22 January 2020 19:05:29 UTC