- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 12:05:41 -0700
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Tuesday 2012-08-28 08:41 -0700, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 4:34 AM, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com> wrote: > > !/*really?*/important; > > > > Can't reps from google, ms, etc see if they can verify a single instance of > > this in the wild? That is just too weird, I don't generally put things > > beyond people, but I just honestly can't imagine someone doing that for > > real... > > Pending an investigation by me, I've just made the spec disallow that, > and require the DELIM(!) and IDENT(important) tokens to be immediately > adjacent. Otherwise I have to add a stack that remembers what was > seen, so I can push them all into the property if I don't eventually > see the IDENT(important) that I expect. :/ > > This is noted as a difference from CSS2.1 in the list at the end of > the parser, so I'll remember. I don't see why it's worth making this change. Does your parsing spec have a framework so inflexible that it can't describe the current CSS rules? Why? And if so, how can it possibly describe the rest of CSS? -David -- 𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂 𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
Received on Tuesday, 28 August 2012 19:06:09 UTC