- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 16:35:21 +0200
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 00:16:24 +0200, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote: > On Thursday 2009-06-11 19:06 +0200, Øyvind Stenhaug wrote: >> The Media Queries syntax section[1] says that "The media_query_list >> production defined below replaces the medium production from CSS2". >> However, according to the grammar in the latter document[2] a media rule >> may contain a comma-separated list of 'medium' tokens. My interpretation >> is that one would then end up with something like this: > > Yeah, this seems wrong. Agreed. > One possible fix would be to say that for CSS usage of media > queries, the "media_query" production replaces the "medium" > production from CSS 2.1. This would mean that "@media {}" would be > invalid. This would leave the "media_query_list" production to be > used only by other specifications. > > I think the next easiest change would be to make an editorial change > to CSS 2.1, and add another production: > media_list > : medium [ COMMA S* medium ] > ; > and then change both the "import" and "media" productions to > reference media_list instead of writing out the above syntax by hand > in both places. Then css-mediaqueries could says that > media_query_list replaces media_list. This would mean that "@media > {}" is valid. > > For what it's worth, Gecko accepts "@media {}" (as meaning the same > as "@media all {}"). (I think it has since I implemented media > queries, but didn't before.) I'm ok either way though allowing @media {} would give consistency with media="" from HTML (and was the intention, admittedly). Anyone else? -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Friday, 24 July 2009 14:36:17 UTC