W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2009

Re: [css3-selectors] LC issues #5

From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:12:14 +0200
Message-ID: <4ADE27AE.3080903@moonhenge.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
fantasai wrote:
> Anton Prowse wrote:
>> Issue 5e:  There is no discussion in this subsection of the omission of
>> the + sign before a, which is curious given that all other possible
>> omissions are discussed.
> This is because the omission of + before a is covered by plus signs
> on positive integers being optional. The + before the b, in the full
> syntax, is considered binary operator between an and b, so saying
> that an can be dropped is not enough.

Pedantically speaking, a signed positive integer is not the same thing
as a positive integer.  (The + sign is optional before positive integers
only in informal settings which blur the two.)  The grammar permits a +
sign before a, but neither the prose nor the examples mention it.  I
think there's a need for a sentence saying that the + sign is both
permitted and optional.

Anton Prowse
Received on Tuesday, 20 October 2009 21:14:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:13:40 UTC