- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2008 21:15:35 -0700
- To: Andrei Polushin <polushin@gmail.com>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
Andrei Polushin wrote: > > Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> Andrei Polushin <polushin@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Was there such a discussion, or a formal decision on this, or not yet? >>> >>> I would prefer to re-allow whitespace between the CSS function name >>> and the opening '(', i.e. to split the FUNCTION token. It might sound >>> too radical, but what was the reason to disallow it in past? >>> Otherwise, and as a consequence, now it's hard to allow an optional >>> whitespace in such a non-functional context. >> >> We have only discussed this in the context of media queries. I don't >> think changing this aspect of CSS is planned. > > OK, in context of media queries - what were the opinions of that > discussion? > > The specification should /clearly/ describe how the following is parsed: > > @media screen and(color) { /* ... */ } > > Possible alternatives are: > > 1. It is an error, because "and(" is a FUNCTION token, not allowed in > grammar of media_query_list. Specification should explain this somehow, > provide an example, then describe the workaround for writing this > correctly (i.e. it inserting a space before the opening '('). > > 2. It is not an error, because each FUNCTION token is locally split into > IDENT and '(' tokens in context of parsing the media_query_list > production. Specification should explicitly state this, if it prescribes > such behavior. > > In either case, there is no need to change the global CSS syntax rules. > Hopefully that's a matter of local decision, to be made by media-queries > specification. > Sigh. whitespace in CSS already have multiple meanings in CSS. It is not just a separator but a combinator in selector context and is operator - value list elements glue (known there as 'empty'). So I think it will not harm anyone if in MQ whitespace will play a role of just a tokens delimiter. MQ is going to be used not only in CSS so syntax should be as less peculiar as possible. So I vote for your #2. Sigh №2. And that minus sign ... What about excluding '-' from name tokens in MQs? -- Andrew Fedoniouk. http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Monday, 7 April 2008 04:16:10 UTC