- From: Giuseppe Bilotta <giuseppe.bilotta@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 21:57:41 +0200
- To: Zack Weinberg <zweinberg@mozilla.com>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style@w3.org
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Zack Weinberg<zweinberg@mozilla.com> wrote: > Giuseppe Bilotta <giuseppe.bilotta@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> <uri> is either an url() function or an argumento to url() [i.e., >> >> url() is optional] >> > >> > Don't do this either. >> > >> > [ the URI token is very special, and its specialness should not >> > infect any more of the grammar ] >> >> Well, it's in the proposed draft for image(), so I thought it could be >> taken to a more generalized form ... > > I formally objected to that part of the image() spec, too. > > [ The thing I *would* support is changing every use of the URI token to > accept a bare STRING also, and then deprecating URI. ] Could you clarify this part a bit for me please? It is my understanding that URI tokens are essentially a "reduced character set" strings. Are you proposing to lift this restriction, or something else? -- Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta
Received on Wednesday, 19 August 2009 19:58:41 UTC