Sorry for missing that! There's a section in the spec for 'video-*' MQ's <https://drafts.csswg.org/mediaqueries-5/#video-prefixed-features>, and while this is the first to be implemented in Chrome there are others detailed there (most notably video-color-gamut). The 'video-*' MQ concept has not been discussed with TAG, but it was discussed at great length between the media and CSS WGs. You can see the start of that discussion in the media WG here <https://github.com/w3c/media-capabilities/issues/135>, and its jump to the CSS WG here <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4471>. In both places we had representation from different user agents and domain experts.
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 12:51 AM Yoav Weiss <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the update! > > Repeating my question from above, that probably got lost along the way: > Was the concept of `video-*` MQs discussed with the TAG? Are there other > `video-*` MQs that are already shipped? > > On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 9:33 PM Will Cassella <[email protected]> wrote: > >> There's been movement on the Github issue >> <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6793#issuecomment-973647057> >> regarding >> the spec, and the consensus is that the way Safari has done things (having >> dynamic-range: >> standard always return true, and dynamic-range: high be evaluated >> against the capabilities of the display) is what we should be doing, and >> the wording of the spec should be adjusted as well. I've updated our >> implementation to reflect that. >> >> On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 12:04 PM Chris Harrelson <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Ok thanks. It looks like the CSSWG discussed the issue and there still >>> needs to be more discussion before a resolution is achieved, so we'll wait >>> for that. >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 3:45 PM Will Cassella <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hey Chris, >>>> >>>> I’ve filed an issue on the csswg-drafts repo >>>> <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6793> asking for the >>>> wording to be adjusted in the spec. In the original discussion surrounding >>>> this media query, the intent was for this to be reflective of the display >>>> device and not an overall representation of the user agent's capabilities. >>>> I did some research into Safari's implementation >>>> <https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/blob/e1adc392ff841dee89aab69af21e3c429e4d5c88/Source/WebCore/css/MediaQueryEvaluator.cpp#L453> >>>> of this query, and while they similarly implement dynamic-range: high >>>> with respect to the display device, their treatment of dynamic-range: >>>> standard isn't in line with the spec (it always returns true, even on >>>> HDR displays). After some discussion with +chcunningham, we think this may >>>> be the correct path forward for Chrome as well as sites are already using >>>> this query on Safari, and it makes sense from a backwards compatibility >>>> standpoint (how should dynamic-range: high react if an ultra-high enum >>>> is ever added?). I'm still waiting to get feedback on the Github issue I >>>> filed at the moment. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Will >>>> >>>> On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 12:30 PM Chris Harrelson <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, there were some discussions of the spec, and other questions, so >>>>> far in the thread. Will, could you summarize the current status? Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 12:04 PM David Baron <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 2:38 PM Yoav Weiss <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Friday, October 22, 2021 at 10:19:44 PM UTC+2 Fernando Serboncini >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [coming from the other thread... :) ] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 to what David said. It doesn't seem that returning dynamic-range: >>>>>>>> high right now would be useful. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The spec could use some clarification: >>>>>>>> - clarify if those criterias need to be supported on different >>>>>>>> conditions: CSS, images, canvas, ... >>>>>>>> - clarify if the criterias need to be supported for both >>>>>>>> with/without alpha (afaik there may be implementation differences >>>>>>>> there, >>>>>>>> but I may be wrong here). >>>>>>>> - I wonder if the definitions of high contrast/peak brightness >>>>>>>> should match the industry definitions for HDR displays? I'm not an >>>>>>>> expert, >>>>>>>> but I know those exist. >>>>>>>> I think it's potentially okay to ignore those definitions, but I'd >>>>>>>> ask for a rationale here. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think it's a great thing to summarize hdr into a single media >>>>>>>> query, but the risk here would be to release a semantic that guarantees >>>>>>>> very little, and therefore is not useful in the long run. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 10:04 AM David Baron <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This sounds like exactly the sort of case where an implementation >>>>>>>>> should report (dynamic-range: standard) and (video-dynamic-range: >>>>>>>>> high). It would be great to see the spec clarified to make it >>>>>>>>> clearer what UA support is expected for each, though. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -David >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 7:03 PM Will Cassella <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Copying over from the other thread (trying to continue the >>>>>>>>>> discussion here): >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The spec <https://www.w3.org/TR/mediaqueries-5/#dynamic-range> >>>>>>>>>> requires >>>>>>>>>>> that "The combination of the User Agent and the output device >>>>>>>>>>> fulfill all >>>>>>>>>>> of the following criteria" when describing what it means to be high >>>>>>>>>>> dynamic-range. Since Chromium doesn't support wide-gamut colors in >>>>>>>>>>> CSS, >>>>>>>>>>> HTML, or Canvas >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> David - I'm likely missing something here, but I thought (based on >>>>>>> this thread >>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/epSTNPYkLIs/m/o5l7pZk1AwAJ>) >>>>>>> that we do have wide-gamut support in CSS, HTML and Canvas. >>>>>>> Are you saying we don't support this due to lack of color level 4 >>>>>>> support? Or something else? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> That intent makes it sound like we have wide-gamut support for canvas >>>>>> (though others would be able to speak more authoritatively about it) but >>>>>> I >>>>>> don't think we do in HTML or CSS. (I also should have included images in >>>>>> my list, though I think if we have support with canvas then we probably >>>>>> do >>>>>> for images as well.).) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> I also didn't interpret the spec as saying anything about gamut (but >>>>>>> rather about color depth >>>>>>> <https://www.w3.org/TR/mediaqueries-5/#color>), although it may be >>>>>>> possible that wide gamuts and high color depth correlate 1:1. Can you >>>>>>> clarify if that's what you meant? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I should have been more precise about meeting the spec's requirements >>>>>> rather than just using the term "wide-gamut". You're correct that it's >>>>>> not >>>>>> 1:1, though I think that in practice an implementation is unlikely to >>>>>> meet >>>>>> the spec's requirements on color depth and contrast ratio without >>>>>> supporting colors beyond sRGB's gamut. >>>>>> >>>>>> (I also suspect we may not meet the color depth requirement in the >>>>>> spec, perhaps not for canvas or images as well.) >>>>>> >>>>>> -David >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> , I think it's probably incorrect to report that (dynamic-range: >>>>>>>>>>> high) is true based only on the device, which is what it looks >>>>>>>>>>> to me like the current code >>>>>>>>>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/renderer/core/css/media_query_evaluator.cc;l=351-378;drc=4d3cb20c1aebba55e54112531222c7434d29f3b0> >>>>>>>>>>> does. >>>>>>>>>>> Admittedly, the spec could probably use some clarification as to >>>>>>>>>>> what it >>>>>>>>>>> means for the User Agent to fulfill the criteria for both the >>>>>>>>>>> dynamic-range and video-dynamic-range queries, but my >>>>>>>>>>> understanding of what the spec is trying to say is that Chrome >>>>>>>>>>> probably >>>>>>>>>>> shouldn't say that (dynamic-range: high) is true until it >>>>>>>>>>> supports wide-gamut colors in at least some and maybe all of those >>>>>>>>>>> contexts. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I think you're right that the spec needs some clarification, >>>>>>>>>> since we're trying to incrementally enable adoption of HDR on the >>>>>>>>>> web the >>>>>>>>>> intent isn't to signal that HDR is supported by all APIs. We do >>>>>>>>>> already support HDR in some scenarios, such as the <video> element, >>>>>>>>>> so >>>>>>>>>> having these queries exist to let developers detect display >>>>>>>>>> capabilities is >>>>>>>>>> already useful. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 11:27 PM Yoav Weiss < >>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 7:01 AM Will Cassella < >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the feedback! I've updated that section: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Debuggability >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Styles with these media queries can be viewed and edited in the >>>>>>>>>>>> devtools frontend, albeit without proper highlighting. I've >>>>>>>>>>>> created pull >>>>>>>>>>>> requests on the relevant libraries used in the devtools frontend >>>>>>>>>>>> to enable >>>>>>>>>>>> this. https://github.com/stylelint/stylelint/pull/5613 >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/codemirror/CodeMirror/pull/6803 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 20, 2021 at 9:10:36 AM UTC-7 Mathias >>>>>>>>>>>> Bynens wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 5:44 PM Will Cassella < >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Contact [email protected], [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> , [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Explainer >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Adds MediaQueries for detecting HDR vs HDR displays >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.w3.org/TR/mediaqueries-5/#dynamic-range >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.w3.org/TR/mediaqueries-5/#video-dynamic-range >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Specification >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.w3.org/TR/mediaqueries-5/#dynamic-range >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Summary >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Adds media queries to CSS which allow a page to detect the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> current display device’s support for HDR. This feature adds two >>>>>>>>>>>>>> new CSS >>>>>>>>>>>>>> media queries: 'dynamic-range' and 'video-dynamic-range', both >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of which may >>>>>>>>>>>>>> be one of 'standard' or 'high'. Chrome will resolve these >>>>>>>>>>>>>> queries according >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the capabilities of the display device the browser window is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> currently >>>>>>>>>>>>>> positioned on, allowing pages to toggle CSS rules accordingly or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> respond in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Javascript via 'window.matchMedia()'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Blink componentBlink>CSS >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3ECSS> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Motivation >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> As HDR-supported displays become more common, web developers >>>>>>>>>>>>>> need ways to enable HDR content on their web pages without >>>>>>>>>>>>>> compromising the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> experience for users of non-HDR displays, or mixed-HDR >>>>>>>>>>>>>> multi-display >>>>>>>>>>>>>> setups. CSS already provides the 'media query' concept for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> toggling rules >>>>>>>>>>>>>> based on display device characteristics, and this feature >>>>>>>>>>>>>> extends that set >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of queries to enable detecting HDR support on the current >>>>>>>>>>>>>> display device. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Initial public proposal >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> TAG reviewNot Filed. This is an incremental change to CSS >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Media Queries, already adopted by CSS WG. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I agree a TAG review is not needed for the `dynamic-range` MQ, >>>>>>>>>>> as it's shipped in Safari and adopted by the CSSWG. >>>>>>>>>>> The video variant however doesn't meet that criteria. Was the >>>>>>>>>>> concept of `video-*` MQs discussed with the TAG? Are there other >>>>>>>>>>> `video-*` >>>>>>>>>>> MQs that are already shipped? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> TAG review statusNot applicable >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Risks >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Interoperability and Compatibility >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gecko: Worth prototyping ( >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/584) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> WebKit: Shipped/Shipping ( >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://webkit.org/blog/10247/new-webkit-features-in-safari-13-1/) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Partially implemented - `video-dynamic-range` not yet supported >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Web developers: Positive ( >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4471#issuecomment-548085935) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Feature designed with the help of Netflix. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Debuggability >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> No specific DevTools support >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Please follow https://goo.gle/devtools-checklist and >>>>>>>>>>>>> elaborate on this a little bit. Per the guide, we need to ensure >>>>>>>>>>>>> DevTools >>>>>>>>>>>>> supports basic editing of this new media query. It looks like >>>>>>>>>>>>> this works >>>>>>>>>>>>> out of the box in Canary. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ?Yes >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://wpt.fyi/results/css/mediaqueries/dynamic-range.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Flag nameCSSDynamicRangeMediaQueries >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Requires code in //chrome?False >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tracking bughttps://crbug.com/1224711 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Estimated milestones97 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5680926106320896 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.chromestatus.com/>. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it, send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CA%2BF%3DP4hQtag7Ja_7HF4jRHbuC8h5-_0TzjoJvVEMHmrUeZYW9g%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CA%2BF%3DP4hQtag7Ja_7HF4jRHbuC8h5-_0TzjoJvVEMHmrUeZYW9g%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from >>>>>>>>>>>> it, send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/6655cbcd-90a1-4b34-a332-5adeada4b53fn%40chromium.org >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/6655cbcd-90a1-4b34-a332-5adeada4b53fn%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAG0MU3gbBzJUttDWuWDRFWnP-w7%3DP4G7TrBPJiU%3DyizEH2%2Bz_Q%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAG0MU3gbBzJUttDWuWDRFWnP-w7%3DP4G7TrBPJiU%3DyizEH2%2Bz_Q%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAG0MU3iqUMAHBvXyqNQ8p2QPdSOTc7u4o8waE5GZ80_Aehnw%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAG0MU3iqUMAHBvXyqNQ8p2QPdSOTc7u4o8waE5GZ80_Aehnw%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>> . >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CA%2BF%3DP4jQTkmPvDLBM_t_0S%3D6k70UVdcszQ01hQELmE%3Dfp81JPA%40mail.gmail.com >>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CA%2BF%3DP4jQTkmPvDLBM_t_0S%3D6k70UVdcszQ01hQELmE%3Dfp81JPA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CA%2BF%3DP4i2mZkrqm-K5S5sGUWxPo4oj5ewZ-B%2BR%3Dpxn777mMQACQ%40mail.gmail.com.
