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

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

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 10:19:10 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBe1rqjCPn6o187rBkTw6e5xA-pVDyx6ZZMdqh0+q3Wow@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 11:48 PM, Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr> wrote:
> Le 14/06/2012 02:44, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit :
>> Declaration
>> mode has been altered to accept at-rules as well as declarations.
>> (This also makes it easier in the future to accept at-rules inside of
>> style rules, which we want for a few things like Mixins and such.)
> So is it up to each at-rule to define in which "context" it is allowed? For
> example, @import is only allowed at the stylesheet top-level[1]; @top-left
> only in @page. Style rules would be allowed to contain at-rules, but no
> at-rule that currently exists is allowed to be contained in a style rule.

Yes, as usual.  I'll probably define a few terms to help with this so
future at-rule definitions can just hook into them.

> Should parsers preserve the overall ordering when something contains both
> declarations and at-rules? ie. should they have a single list with mixed
> content, or can they provide two separate lists (like style and cssRules in

That's for CSSOM to decide.  It doesn't matter yet in the one place
where they're mixable (@page), but if we do mixins as an at-rule like
@include or something, it will.

Received on Thursday, 14 June 2012 17:19:59 UTC

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