W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2012

Re: [CSS21] deciding on errata to CSS 2.1 (was Re: Errata to disallow 'inherit' after comma in 'font-family')

From: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 14:57:36 -0700 (PDT)
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <1537017065.236175.1336082256925.JavaMail.root@mozilla.com>
fantasai wrote:

> There *was* proposed wording, and it *was* posted as a link in IRC:
>    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Apr/0638.html

No, that's different wording from the resolution.  And as has already
been pointed out by others, these both suffer from the same problem,
the wording is not sufficient to resolve what the intent is, namely
that for unquoted family names made up of one or more ident's, none of
those ident's can be a "reserved" keyword, where that list includes
'inherit', 'default', or 'initial'.

In fact, I think your idea on IRC was the best, make the family name
syntax consistent by saying that it's always:

  <string> | <ident>+ | inherit

where <ident> in the set ['default', 'inherit', 'initial'] are
considered invalid.

I think this belongs in CSS3 Fonts but I see little reason to spend 
time on a 2.1 errata.


John Daggett
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2012 21:58:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:15 UTC