> I'd describe that as the grammar *disagreeing*, since the grammar > says that commas are allowed in the production for unquoted URIs > (they're part of the range *-~). Yes, my bad. > Likewise, the tokenization in section 4.1, which is significantly > more important than the appendix G grammar, also (like the grammar > in appendix G) says that commas are allowed. Great. > I agree with this proposal to change 4.3.4, since that would make it > match both grammars (4.1 and G) and implementations. > > > And in Appendix G: > > > > url ([!#$%&*\~,]|{nonascii}|{escape}) > > And I disagree with the proposal to change the grammar to make it > not match implementations. (I'm also not quite sure what you meant > to type in that proposal.) You may disregard this part. Thanks !Received on Wednesday, 17 March 2010 23:40:32 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:13:44 UTC