W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-admin@w3.org > March 2013

[Bug 21207] New: X-UA-Compatible should be recognized for <meta http-equiv=...>

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 05:01:09 +0000
To: public-html-admin@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-21207-2495@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>

            Bug ID: 21207
           Summary: X-UA-Compatible should be recognized for <meta
    Classification: Unclassified
           Product: HTML WG
           Version: unspecified
          Hardware: Macintosh
                OS: MacOS X
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: HTML5 spec
          Assignee: dave.null@w3.org
          Reporter: davidfstr+w3cbugs@gmail.com
        QA Contact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
                CC: mike@w3.org, public-html-admin@w3.org,

=== Background ===
The X-UA-Compatible is an HTTP header used to control the rendering mode of
Internet Explorer and the Google Chrome Frame plugin. It is commonly included
in HTML directly via something like the following (taken from twitter.com):

<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=9,chrome=1">

As currently defined, <meta> does not permit "X-UA-Compatible" as a valid value
in the table § "Pragma directives", nor does it permit it through
§ "Other pragma directives". This means that web pages using this header
will fail validation by the W3C Validator. Maintainer Ville Skytt of the
validator indicates in W3C bug 11954
<https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11954> that this will not be
fixes unless the HTML5 specification is updated to allow this attribute.

Suggested options for revision:

(A) Permit any value for <meta http-equiv="X" ...>. But only define the
semantics of those values explicitly listed in § "Other pragma

(B) Permit any value for <meta http-equiv="X" ...> that begins with a "X-"
prefix, indicating that it is a non-standard header. Interpreters of HTML5 are
explicitly not required to handle such experimental attributes and should
ignore those that are not understood.

(C) Permit "X-UA-Compatible" as an explicit value for <meta http-equiv="X"
...>. However I personally don't think "X-UA-Compatible" requires this kind of
special treatment.

(D) Surprise me.

=== References ===
(0) § Pragma directives
(1) X-UA-Compatible Specification
(2) "chrome=1" in X-UA-Compatible for Google Chrome Frame

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 7 March 2013 05:01:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:57:22 UTC