- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 12:04:45 -0800
- To: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 01/13/2010 11:17 AM, Bert Bos wrote: > > The grammars in CSS 2.1 are bigger than this one and making sure that > they are neither missing S tokens nor have redundant ones is tricky. > That's not an issue in this much simpler draft. > > But there is some confusion between sections 3 and 4. Both claim to > define the syntax. I think we should merge them into a single section. > That could be like this: > > 3. Syntax and Parsing > > The value of the styling attribute must match the syntax of the > contents of a CSS declaration block[link], i.e., > > declaration-list: S* declaration? [ ';' S* declaration? ]*; > > The interpreter must parse the styling attribute’s value using the > same forward-compatible parsing rules that apply to parsing > declaration block contents in a normal CSS style sheet. See > chapter 4 of the CSS 2.1 specification. [CSS21] > > Note that because there is no open brace delimiting the declaration > list in the CSS styling attribute syntax, a close brace (}) in the > styling attribute's value does not terminate the style data: it is > merely an invalid token. > > And then drop section 4. > > The link to appendix G is not needed, because there is already a link to > chapter 4 and all symbols are defined there as well. > > I wonder if it is useful to mention comments. The reference to chapter 4 > implies that comments can occur, but will all implementers notice that? > A note like this might help: > > Note that comment tokens aren't shown in the grammar rule above, > following the convention of chapter 4 of CSS 2.1. Ok, I've updated the spec: http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-style-attr/#syntax How does that look? ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 14 January 2010 20:06:46 UTC