FF 59.0a1 fails four tests (g,h,q,r) in https://test.csswg.org/suites/css-cascade-3_dev/nightly-unstable/html/cascade-import-002.htm

We fail the same four tests regardless of whether stylo is enabled, FWIW. So: not a stylo-specific issue.

The test and its resources can be downloaded at https://test.csswg.org/suites/css-cascade-3_dev/nightly-unstable.zip (maybe in some repo, too, but I couldn't find it inside of web-platform-tests) The g,h failures seem to be because this markup fails to work: > <meta http-equiv="Link" content='<support/cascade-import-002h.css>; rel="stylesheet"'> And the q,r failure seems to be because this markup fails to work: > <meta http-equiv="Link" content='<support/cascade-import-002r.css>; rel="stylesheet"'> If I replace those with the more common <link rel="stylesheet"> markup, then the lines turn green. So, this seems to be us not honoring that markup. Also worth noting: no other browser gets these lines right, AFAICT. In latest Chrome, Safari, and Edge: lines a-h are all black (rather than green) and lines q,r are red. (Lines a-h are all black in Firefox, too, if I view the testcase locally -- extracted from the zip file linked above.)

Hmm - I don't see "Link" as one of the valid options for the http-equiv attribute here: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/semantics.html#attr-meta-http-equiv The description of this attribute says: > The http-equiv attribute is an enumerated attribute. The following table lists the keywords defined for this attribute. ...and "Link" is not listed in the table. So I think that means our behavior (disregarding this markup) is correct...? It looks like this is a feature that we used to support, but it was deprecated/unshipped and AFAICT is intentionally unspecced (i.e. intentionally not a spec-compliant feature at this point): https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=587928 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9797 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Aug/0048.html So we're actually correct, I think, and it's bogus that the test relies on this feature. So this is INVALID in that there's no gecko bug here. I think we should file a testsuite bug, wherever these tests are maintained - tantek, would you mind doing that?

(feel free to reopen this bug and morph it to Tech Evang or something, if you prefer, too.)

Thanks for tracking down this test dependence on a non-feature dholbert! I finally tracked down how to file a testsuite bug on this test file (was pretty non-obvious, something I'm separately going to work on improving), and have now done so: https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/issues/9910 Morphed to Tech Evangelism as suggested.

Thanks Tantek, let's go ahead and close this as a dupe of the bug you filed. (But awkwardly, we can't do that, so let's close it as INCOMPLETE).