W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > June 2012

Re: [whatwg] The <pic> element

From: Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net>
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2012 02:32:09 -0500
To: "Anselm Hannemann Web Development" <info@anselm-hannemann.com>
Message-ID: <op.wfda7vgete2ec8@aimac.local>
Cc: whatwg <whatwg@whatwg.org>
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 01:05:23 -0500, Anselm Hannemann Web Development  
<info@anselm-hannemann.com> wrote:

>> An alternative is to pick different delimiters. See, for instance,  
>> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2295#section-8.3>.
>
> I also would like to see another delimiting syntax which is clearer.  
> What about JSON-syntax or just " | "?
> I mean a backslash is not that common in a URL but commas are more and  
> more and you all know that escaping is no fun.
> So we should really try to avoid this.

Another character could work in theory, but I wonder whether it would work  
in practice.

For example <meta name=viewport> was documented to support only comma, but  
thanks to silent error recovery authors ended up using and relying on  
semicolon:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Oct/0652.html

I wonder whether reverse of it could happen with list of sources, e.g.  
unexpected comma parsed as invalid media query could end up delimiting  
sources in some implementations, and then we'll end up with worst of both  
worlds (both ambiguous comma and other unintuitive delimiter needed for  
web-compat).

-- 
regards, Kornel Lesiński
Received on Monday, 4 June 2012 07:32:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:42 UTC