Re: [mediaqueries] Doesn't the spec contains an inexistent token in syntax definition?

So this means that calc() should work in media queries? If so we can
probably look at that for WebKit.

When rewriting the grammar, please consider making "not (media-feature)"
valid.

Cheers
Kenneth


On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 5:36 PM, François REMY
> <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > While I was trying to explain to the guys over Microsoft Connect that
> > Internet Explorer should support the ‘calc()’ function in media queries
> > arguments (something no browser seems to do right now), I noticed
> there’s a
> > problem with the actual defintion of the syntax of CSS Media Queries.
> > Indeed, the spec uses an "expr" token in its "expression" definition :
> >
> >    media_query
> >     : [ONLY | NOT]? S* media_type S* [ AND S* expression ]*
> >     | expression [ AND S* expression ]*
> >     ;
> >
> >    expression
> >     : '(' S* media_feature S* [ ':' S* expr ]? ')' S*
> >     ;
> >
> > but refers to CSS 2.1 Grammar [1] which doesn't seem to define any 'expr'
> > token at all. However, the "expr" token is defined in the CSS3-Syntax
> spec
> > [2], but this is a WD spec and it is not referenced by the CSSMQ REC.
>
> It's in the non-normative Appendix G grammar, which is specialized for
> 2.1: <http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/grammar.html>
>
> (Just in case they then argue back that calc() isn't allowed per that
> grammar: you *obviously* can't literally follow Appendix G, because it
> excludes anything new introduced past 2.1, like the <resolution> type,
> which is obviously valid in MQ.)
>
> In the next few months, as I finish out the Syntax draft, I'll define
> better grammar tokens for these kinds of things to use, and redefine
> the various rule grammars in those terms, so that their grammars can
> look more like CSS property grammar than Lex grammar.  (I'd like to
> avoid requiring people to worry about whitespace when writing
> grammars, for example, as it's commonly gotten wrong.)
>
> ~TJ
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Intel Denmark Aps
> Langelinie Alle 35, DK-2100 Copenhagen
> CVR No. 76716919
>
> This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
> the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
> by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
>
>