On Jan 30, 2012, at 13:45 , Marcos Caceres wrote: > On Monday, 30 January 2012 at 22:22, Robin Berjon wrote: >> Sorry, I should indeed have mentioned that as part of the background. The >> problem with specifying orientation as part of the viewport at rule is that >> it leads to circular dependencies (you can set an orientation inside a media >> query that changes the viewport and triggers and endless loop). The spec >> tries (meekly) to defend against that, but I find it difficult not to get >> the impression that this leads to a tangled mess and that it will confuse >> developers (it certainly confuses me when I try to make sense of the >> circularity avoidance recommendations made in the specification itself). >> This could be solved if it were only to appear in meta elements, but right >> now that's not the case and the section on meta elements in CSS DA isn't >> normative. > > For fun, can you show how that happens with the meta tags? I was the one that > originally proposed the orientation locking using the meta tag, so I'm > interested to hear what happened (or send me pointer). Apologies that I have > not followed the discussion.
How what happens? Endless loops? Sorry if I was unclear but I don't see endless loops happening when using meta elements — only with the pure CSS version. That's why I would prefer to see this leave the CSS space and move to a strictly meta-based approach (or something else like it: manifest, API, I don't have a strong opinion at this point). Right now in CSS DA you can handle this with CSS but with weird provisions against circularity, or with meta but in a manner that is explicitly flagged as non-normative. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
