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

Re: [css3-syntax][css3-values] use of IRIs in url() values

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 14:50:39 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDAbBD0Zm+4UYSN7oJ7e8QK472VBGu1mvock=Vmj-ObmUw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:59 PM, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> wrote:
> Does CSS allow IRIs to be used inside url() values?
>
> data:text/html;charset=utf-8;base64,PCFkb2N0eXBlIGh0bWw%2BPGJvZHkgc3R5bGU9ImJhY2tncm91bmQtaW1hZ2U6IHVybChodHRwOi8vcsOka3Ntw7ZyZ8Olcy5qb3NlZnNzb24ub3JnL3Jha3Ntb3JnYXMuanBnIj4%3D
>
> seems to work in various browsers.  zcorpan pointed out to me that
> css3-syntax should parse the entire url(...iri...) into a URI token, but I
> don't see anything in http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-values/#urls that says
> how to interpret the bit of the token between the parens and the optional
> quotes (i.e. as a URI, an IRI, or something else).

CSS makes no judgement about what's inside of the url() notation.
Both the 2.1 Core Grammar and my recasting in Syntax just accept
everything inbetween the parens.

The only time we care about the contents are when we absolutize the
URLs.  Right now we refer to RFC 3986 for that.  Adam Barth says that
it's a useful enough placeholder for a real URL spec, and that we
shouldn't worry about it further from a CSS perspective.

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2012 21:51:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:54 GMT