- From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
- Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 07:22:52 +0200
- To: "Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu" <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
- CC: WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
Le 09/05/2012 01:07, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu a écrit : > (12/05/09 3:56), Simon Sapin wrote: >> > Whether or not it appears in the "Value:" line for properties, I think >> > that "positive" and such constraints should be defined in terms of >> > numerical comparison, not in character-based grammar. > Why?<integer> is already a syntactical constraint (i.e. 'z-index: 1.0' > isn't valid, albeit 1.0 == 1). The questionable parts are > > 1. is '-0' non-negative? > > [snip other issues with numerical comparison] Ok, I understand the issues. Numerical comparison is especially bad for non-zero values that are rounded to zero because of machine precision. So if the constraint is syntactical, css3-syntax is the place to have it. The "new" state-machine-based css3-syntax already has an "integer" flag on numerical tokens. Adding "positive" and "zero" flags should be enough to define <positive-integer> and other variants. Can V&U3 depend on Syntax3, or will the later not be ready in time? -- Simon Sapin
Received on Wednesday, 9 May 2012 05:23:23 UTC