- From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
- Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 23:55:51 +0100
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
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
Received on Friday, 1 February 2013 22:56:15 UTC