- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:05:39 +0000 (GMT)
- To: fantasai <fantasai@escape.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, fantasai wrote: > > Agreed. An implementation may internally convert all newlines > to linefeeds if it chooses to, but there's no reason for CSS > to mandate this. Actually it's not a may, it's a must. Both XML and SGML normalise newlines to single U+000A characters. So in CSS, that's the newline character. Allowing multiple newline characters or requiring CSS to do line normalisation also introduces massive complications when it comes to the 'content' property. (e.g. '\D' should _not_ create a line-feed, one new line character is enough thanks.) > BTW, using "newline" instead of "linefeed" for property names > would be more inclusive, and it's not any more esoteric. any mention of these characters should really be qualifed by a unicode codepoint, namely U+000A. -- Ian Hickson )\._.,--....,'``. fL "meow" /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. http://index.hixie.ch/ `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 16 December 2002 16:05:47 UTC