On 11/17/21 6:02 AM, Frédéric Wang wrote:
I started to poke through
https://github.com/search?p=5&q=%22-webkit-standard%22&type=Code out
of curiosity and a few things stand out:
1) Some tools used for archiving / exports appear:
Evernote:
https://github.com/karshih/Notes/blob/edf2d8658db898a4d993a22db62722e2d8e23ee8/accounts/www.evernote.com/100389449/content/ACFB7C02-6642-435C-B739-DBE738BDC66D/content.enml
Some "HTTrack Website Copier":
https://github.com/MicIOE/MicIOE.github.io/blob/533ac9fecef9e407b2f82061304fb2ee113c90a0/micioe/main/www.micioe.com/news/news2/2145.html
It's possible the tools were generating the usage, or just capturing
the result of certain pages already using it.
However, the results co-occur a lot with CJK fonts and mso-
properties (MS Office docs saved to web? Outlook emails?). Do we have
a guess at why Chinese documents might pick -webkit-standard over
something else? Is there some kind of layout benefit that we might break?
i.e.,
https://github.com/huanyun-c/egg_linkingLeft/blob/36a00019d54219c07150bdf5fe07445d1d1a221a/app/view/rule/fwxy.ejs#L31-L37
https://github.com/english5-net/e5-ckeditor5-build/blob/a60acf23729ba6a48671cb3d0136294a26893360/packages/ckeditor5-paste-from-office/tests/_data/list/resume-template/normalized.safari.word2016.html#L3-L9
Thanks for taking a look. I'm not sure I have a proper answer to your
question, but some comments below. In any case, maybe we want to be
safer : analyze the pages reporting the counter and rely on a Finch flag?
I think looking at a few dozen random samples of affected pages by
someone who can read these pages and discern (subtle?) breakage would be
useful. If you found anything concerning there, perhaps a Finch flag
would be wise before moving forward.
Regarding the proprietary -mso properties, they are not affected by
this intent to unship AFAIK.
Right, just pointing out a co-occurrence that might hint at use cases or
sources.
Links 1, 3, 4 has a font-family with a single -webkit-standard while
link 2 has a quoted '-webkit-standard' value (whether the name is
quoted or not should not make a difference for Blink). It's indeed
possible these pages are affected by this intent if the inherited font
is not the default.
Checking WPT test css/cssom/font-family-serialization-001.html and
also the initial value, it does not seem that WebKit or Blink
serialize "-webkit-standard" name (unless they were already specified
in the document). So I guess authoring tools do that on purpose,
although I can't explain the rationale. Doc 4 has "Safari" in its
name, which suggests it's designed for webkit.
Regarding CJK, we have special behavior on Android for these
characters. And bug 1252383 showed that an internal use of
"-webkit-standard" allowed to work around a Skia bug 12503. Bug again,
I can't explain why someone would need to do it explicitly...
The @font-face{ font-family:"-webkit-standard"; } in link 3 is also
weird, I'm not sure what's happening when we don't specify an src...
--
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/c3ba13cd-65b7-ff5b-e088-6a3614258abd%40chromium.org.
