- From: Guillaume via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 20:32:17 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Based on the current definition of a [non-strict comma-containing production](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-values-5/#non-strict-comma-containing-production):
- `opacity: var(--custom, 1 {})` is **valid**
- `opacity: var(--custom, {} 1)` is **invalid**
Both are **valid** in the current version of Chrome and Firefox.
@tabatkins, could you please tell me if breaking backwards-compatibility is intentional?
I am not sure I fully understand the previous comments but I suspect that only a standalone {}-block should act differently.
--
GitHub Notification of comment by cdoublev
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9539#issuecomment-2689050085 using your GitHub account
--
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 27 February 2025 20:32:18 UTC