- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 23:17:58 +0000 (UTC)
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- cc: Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, 17 Apr 2013, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > > > > That's even more lax than HASH. I would normally think it appropriate > > for CSS to defer to HTML5 on this sort of thing (and I do think the > > principle of least surprise says that whatever can go in id="...", CSS > > should be able to match it with #...; and I'm always in favor of > > getting rid of quirks, ceteris paribus) but there's no way we can be > > *that* lax. Maybe both specs need to change here. > > Right, it's looser, but I don't think we want to special-case it > sufficiently that we go past the confines of the hash token. I'm > satisfied with using escapes at that point. The intent on the HTML side was to rely on CSS escaping, FWIW. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 19 April 2013 23:18:19 UTC