* Etan Wexler wrote: >Are escaped characters in CSS reserved identifiers equivalent to the >literal forms? Or, rather, are the identifiers then equivalent? >Observe: > >@impo\rt \url("style") \screen; Interpreting CSS Level 2, this one is invalid, the import keyword is a literal string in Appendix D.2, same for the the url function as in section 4.1.1 and as per section 4.1.3 identifiers may *contain* escapes, but the prose doesn't state that nmstart tokens may contain escapes, section 4.1.1 conflicts with this, one of those sections is in error. >If the escaped forms are equivalent, the grammars of CSS1, CSS2, and >CSS3 need an overhaul. If the escaped forms are not equivalent, the >CSS object model needs a way to differentiate between escapes and >literal characters. Hm, it has, if they are not equivalent, an \url(...) would be a CSS_UNKNOWN primitive value while url(...) would be a CSS_URI value... However, it's impossible to make this distinction, if background\-color: green isn't canonically equivalent to background-color: green what is it then? The question rather is, do escapes apply to predefined identifiers, i.e. is the escaped property valid at all? This one of those cases where I said the CSS Level 2 grammar is way too lose. regards, -- Björn Höhrmann { mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de } http://www.bjoernsworld.de am Badedeich 7 } Telefon: +49(0)4667/981028 { http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de 25899 Dagebüll { PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 } http://www.learn.to/quote/Received on Monday, 8 October 2001 09:29:46 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:11 GMT