Skip to content

Latest commit



79 lines (56 loc) · 2.33 KB

File metadata and controls

79 lines (56 loc) · 2.33 KB

supported-media meta tag


Google Search implements this proposal for signed exchanges.


This tag could be used for a mobile-only page:

<meta name=supported-media content="only screen and (max-width: 640px)">

This tag could be used for a desktop-only page:

<meta name=supported-media content="only screen and (min-width: 640px)">


Many sites rely on serving different HTML to different devices (e.g. mobile/desktop). This is typically done by server-side User-Agent (UA) sniffing. This technique conflicts with caching by upstream intermediaries, but the purposes served by both are important.

Proposed solution

Pages that Vary by UA should specify the set of devices that they support via a new meta tag. For example:

  <meta name=supported-media content="(max-width: 8in) and (hover: none)">

Referrers should not link to cached copies unless the device meets the given query.

User agents should ignore this meta tag.


A <meta> element, as a child of the document's <head> element, where its name= is "supported-media", and its content= is a well-formed level 3 media query list in the same character encoding as the page, less than 200 characters, and containing only the below supported media types and features:

  • all
  • screen
  • hover
  • pointer
  • the following, plus their min- and max- variants:
    • height
    • width
    • aspect-ratio
    • device-height
    • device-width
    • device-aspect-ratio

Referrers should make no restrictions as to the byte position of this element.


If the meta element is not present or doesn't meet the above syntax requirements, referrers may assume that the page renders on all devices.

For pages that already vary by User-Agent header, this media query would likely not exactly match the behavior of their UA sniffing algorithm. Publishers should err on the side of specificity over sensitivity. The cost of a false positive in the media query is the page renders incorrectly; the cost of a false negative is the page renders slower (because the cache entry is skipped and the referrer links to origin).


See this analysis of the limitations of this specification and its alternatives.