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

Re: [css3-selectors] LC issues #5

From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:48:07 +0200
Message-ID: <4ADE3017.1090108@moonhenge.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
Anton Prowse wrote:
> fantasai wrote:
>> Anton Prowse wrote:
>>> Issue 5e:  There is no discussion in this subsection of the omission of
>>> the + sign before a, which is curious given that all other possible
>>> omissions are discussed.
>> This is because the omission of + before a is covered by plus signs
>> on positive integers being optional. The + before the b, in the full
>> syntax, is considered binary operator between an and b, so saying
>> that an can be dropped is not enough.
> Pedantically speaking, a signed positive integer is not the same thing
> as a positive integer.  (The + sign is optional before positive integers
> only in informal settings which blur the two.)  The grammar permits a +
> sign before a, but neither the prose nor the examples mention it.  I
> think there's a need for a sentence saying that the + sign is both
> permitted and optional.

Apologies, this is indeed a non-issue given the definition of integer in
CSS21 / css3-values.

Anton Prowse
Received on Tuesday, 20 October 2009 21:50:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:30 UTC