RE: css with regex

A couple of questions:

 

a) can you stop the CSS validator from importing files to check?

b) most likely the structural checkering and stripping can be done with
SAC all in one phase?

 

Jo

 

________________________________

From: Laura Holmes [mailto:holmes@google.com] 
Sent: 17 August 2007 20:49
To: Jo Rabin
Cc: Sean Owen; public-mobileok-checker
Subject: Re: css with regex

 

That seems like a pretty feasible thing to do. So, unless anyone else
has any objections, I'll go ahead and start making these changes on
Monday?

- Laura

On 8/17/07, Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi> wrote:


Well, I suppose that there is a complication in that if the CSS is not
well-formed then stripping out the bits that don't count actually
involves parsing the css so you strip out only the right bits.

So I think the processing sequence would have to be: 

Parse as CSS 2.1
Report only structural errors
If no structural errors then strip out the @media and @import related
bits
Extract the referenced images and imports
Parse as CSS level 1 [while finding a way to suppress checking of the 
remaining imported files]

Or something like that.
Jo


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-mobileok-checker-request@w3.org [mailto:public-mobileok-
> checker-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sean Owen
> Sent: 17 August 2007 18:50
> To: Jo Rabin
> Cc: Laura Holmes; public-mobileok-checker
> Subject: Re: css with regex
>
> Nah, I don't think it's all that bad. You find some particular
> patterns and cut out some bits of the document before parsing. It can 
> be done line by line, preserving line numbers, without any more
> trouble than that. There should not be any change to how anything else
> is printed. Basically we are manually processing @media before turning

> other tools loose on it, which smooths out the wrinkle we've
> introduced in the DDC, that CSS1 + @media is supported.
>
> Sean
>
> On 8/17/07, Jo Rabin < jrabin@mtld.mobi <mailto:jrabin@mtld.mobi> >
wrote:
> > If I had enough hair to raise, it would sound hair raising!
> >
> >
> >
> > I think that it might work, but also think it raises the specter of 
> pretty
> > printing the CSS just to report the line numbers, rather as we have
> > discussed the same with reference to XHTML error reporting ...