- From: Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 19:40:22 -0400
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > On Wed, 17 Apr 2013, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> > That's even more lax than HASH. I would normally think it appropriate >> > for CSS to defer to HTML5 on this sort of thing (and I do think the >> > principle of least surprise says that whatever can go in id="...", CSS >> > should be able to match it with #...; and I'm always in favor of >> > getting rid of quirks, ceteris paribus) but there's no way we can be >> > *that* lax. Maybe both specs need to change here. >> >> Right, it's looser, but I don't think we want to special-case it >> sufficiently that we go past the confines of the hash token. I'm >> satisfied with using escapes at that point. > > The intent on the HTML side was to rely on CSS escaping, FWIW. I think what would make me personally happy, here, is: CSS relaxes #xxx in a selector to accept any HASH token. HTML adds a non-normative note for authors discouraging use of id values containing ASCII characters other than A-Za-z0-9_- . zw
Received on Friday, 19 April 2013 23:40:44 UTC