W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2009

RE: [CSS21] last edition: pity

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 14:06:56 -0700
To: 'Andrey Mikhalev' <amikhal@abisoft.spb.ru>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <DBCD4020258D924A9887739500CF8E599B77F9D57D@NA-EXMSG-C125.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Feedback on spec changes is always very welcome, but calling them 'trash', 'nonsense' and such is neither strictly necessary nor a productive way to engage the editors and the larger group. Thanks.

> as i said, error handling is right opposite.
> unexpected token in selector invalidate statement.
> unexpected token in declaration invalidate only declaration.
> from now, try to write down tokens which are 'unexpected in statement',
> and you got the picture.
> 
> futuremore, sentence violate following:
> 4.1.6
> A block starts with a left curly brace ({) and ends with the matching
> right curly brace (}). In between there may be any tokens, except that
> parentheses (( )), brackets ([ ]) and braces ({ }) must always occur in
> matching pairs and may be nested
> 4.1.7
> The selector (see also the section on selectors) consists of everything
> up
> to (but not including) the first left curly brace ({)
> 
> note last sentence does not enforce 'matching pairs', and, in fact, is
> prose replacemnent for
> error '{'
> parser directive.
> 
> worth all above formal objection?

First, I suggest reading on the background of this change: http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1#issue-24

Second, as Giovanni points out, a declaration is not a statement. 

Maybe an example would help explain how you're reading the rule i.e. if there is a contradiction, something that used to be invalid may now be valid or ambiguous ?
Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2009 21:07:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:18 GMT