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

On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:57 PM, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com> wrote:
> 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.

That's still wrong, because of comma-separated values.  ^_^

You want:

[ <string> | <ident>+ ]# | inherit

...and then explicitly disallow 'inherit' as an <ident> value.

This is just filling in a hole at the 2.1 level, so we can
consistently and explicitly make the global keywords *not* be part of
the <ident> type.

~TJ

Received on Saturday, 5 May 2012 01:37:08 UTC