- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 17:35:34 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `Allow empty functions in <general-enclosed>`, and agreed to the following: * `RESOLVED: Accept change to allow empty functional notations in <general-enclosed>` <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <fantasai> Topic: Allow empty functions in <general-enclosed><br> <fantasai> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6803<br> <fantasai> TabAtkins: We had some leftover grammar from a previous change that accidentally implied that if you had a <general-enclosed> in functional form it had to ahve something inside the parens<br> <fantasai> TabAtkins: previously could be empty<br> <fantasai> TabAtkins: small change to make the value optional, so that foo() would be valid<br> <TabAtkins> @media fn() {...}<br> <TabAtkins> @media fn(foo) {...}<br> <fantasai> TabAtkins: wanted to make sure this counts as <general-enclosed> with unknown value rather than syntax error<br> <fantasai> florian: asking for approval because spec is in CR<br> <fantasai> RESOLVED: Accept change to allow empty functional notations in <general-enclosed><br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6803#issuecomment-995013016 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 15 December 2021 17:35:36 UTC