Marc Espie wrote on Wed, May 16, 2018 at 11:28:31AM +0200:
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:51:43PM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>> x...@dr.com wrote on Tue, May 15, 2018 at 07:47:45PM +0200:
>>> The "viewport" meta tag significantly improves readability and
>>> usability on my phone when I add it to http://man.openbsd.org pages:
>>> [meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0"]
>> There is no way i will use that.
>> It is not defined in any standard.
> As someone pointed it out, it is in a proposal, improves things on several
> devices, and is harmless on others.
> You quite well know that the web evolves by practice first, and
> standardization later.
> We are talking about something that's currently already written, will
> likely become a standard in some months, and helps using tools.
> Why resist ?
Because web design is full of cruft.
If i would put in every micro-optimization tweak that somebody
suggests for making something better in some situation, we would
soon end up with HTML code and a style sheet that are large and
For example, just last week, somebody requested that i change
"font-family: monospace, monospace;"
for exactly the same reasons you are putting forward: It (arguably)
looks better in some situations, it is (arguably) harmless in some
other situations, it is widespread practice in the industry, and
it is interpreted in similar ways by several popular browsers.
No. The only way to stay sane is to restrict ourselves to elements
and rules that are really required. Our HTML and CSS should only
contain elements and rules with respect to topics that we do want
to say something about.
I do *not* want to restrict what the browser does with the viewport,
so there is no reason to write code for fiddling with the browser's