- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 19:37:57 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I'd prefer not to add more Selectors-specific tokens unless necessary; they can theoretically make things complicated in the future. That said, the original Selectors-specific tokens were added so that the Selectors grammar was LR(1) (that is, just based on the next token to be consumed, no additional "lookahead" at all). If we want to maintain that invariant, we will have to add `>>` and `>>>` tokens. If we don't care about that invariant (and are okay with expanding Selectors to an LR(3) language - CSS in general is LR(4) iiuc), then we can avoid doing this, and drop the other special Selectors tokens, too. -- GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/712#issuecomment-263371470 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 28 November 2016 19:38:04 UTC