Re: [css3-syntax] Preserved vs. non-preserved tokens.

Le 01/02/2013 07:30, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit :
> Hmm, you're right.*However*, I'm not sure that it's so bad to fail
> the entire rule due to egregrious syntax errors.  Our forward-compat
> and error-handling is meant to let us extend things in the future, but
> I think it's safe to assume that we won't ever add some new syntax
> that employs an unbalanced ] token.
>
> I doubt there's an interop problem with it, so if impls are okay with
> the change, I think I'll keep it.

I would not object to this change, but I don’t really like the 
inconsistency this causes in the handling of different kinds of parse 
errors.

Anyway, since you asked for impl feedback I added this as a proposed F2F 
topic: http://wiki.csswg.org/planning/tucson-2013#agenda

-- 
Simon Sapin