W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2004

Re: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visufx.html

From: Philip TAYLOR <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:04:32 +0000
To: ernestcline@mindspring.com
Cc: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, www-style@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1AwJID-00056P-00@uranium.btinternet.com>

Ernest Cline wrote:


> I don't see where it would harm the tokenization if for example
> FUNCTION were changed from "ident '('" to "ident w '('".
> as in standard CSS, the left parenthesis is only used
> following a function identifier.


> On the other hand I don't see where there would be any
> real benefit either, so don't call me an enthusiastic
> supporter of this either.

The "real benefit" that I perceive, and the reason underlying my
original request, is that some programmers /as a matter of course/
separate function/procedure names from a following parenthesis
by a space, because they believe that it makes the code more
readable.  Such programmers, when writing CSS, would tend to
insert a space between "clip" and the following parenthesis as
a matter of course, and then be confused when a user agent fails
to honour their intentions.  Since no ambiguity could result from
the allowing of white space at this point, I respectfully ask that
the specs. be amended to allow white space in this and all analogous
contexts when they are next revised.

Philip Taylor
Received on Thursday, 26 February 2004 06:03:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:11 UTC