- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 20:08:33 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Ugh, hit Comment too soon. > Therefore `>/**/>/**/>` is allowed to mean a `>>>` combinator, but probably it does not make any sense. I don't think this is a reasonable argument. `./**/foo` is a valid class selector, `:/**/hover` is a valid pseudo-class selector. On the other hand, `#/**/foo` is not a valid ID selector, and `:nth-child/**/(2n)` is not a valid pseudo-class selector. In other words, whether comments are allowed in a given spot is already mostly irrelevant, and just falls out of accidental details of the grammar definition. We don't actually consider it when designing anything, and so it shouldn't affect our thinking here either. So, back to my original argument: *if* it's important that Selectors remain LR(1), then we need to add two new tokens to handle the combinators. If it's not, we don't and shouldn't, and should go ahead and remove the other special combinators too. -- GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/712#issuecomment-263379608 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 28 November 2016 20:08:39 UTC