W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2012

Re: [css3-syntax] First draft of parser section completed

From: Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 14:52:43 +0800
Message-ID: <4FD6E73B.8000506@csail.mit.edu>
To: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
(12/06/12 14:32), Simon Sapin wrote:
> Le 12/06/2012 08:15, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu a écrit :
>> I only feel strongly that we should document the difference between
>> "Parse Error" and the CSS 2.1 "Core Grammar", so for whoever implements
>> this grammar (e.g. tinycss) this is still trackable.
> I plan to update tinycss as soon as css3-syntax is stable enough.
> I realize this might be a breaking change for pretty much any usage of
> tinycss, but I think that the project is still young enough to afford it.

Can you provide some examples about this? Some objections to Core
Grammar changes are based on the assumption that changing it is breaking
tools, so it would be helpful to understand more about it.

Also, I have some questions out of curiosity.

1. What is the benefit of making the CSS 2.1 parser throw when there's
an input not following the core grammar? Would giving warnings be a
better approach?

2. Is it possible to build a parser on top of tinycss which never throws
and follows the error handling rules of CSS 2.1 like a browser?

3. Does tinycss, as it is, need a special conformance class so that it
can be considered conforming (e.g. The HTML spec defines a bunch of
non-browser conformance classes. It also says a UA can do the error
handling *or* fail at the first error encountered.), since there are a
bunch of test cases in the test suite which will just make tinycss throw?

Received on Tuesday, 12 June 2012 06:53:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:00 UTC