RE: [css-syntax] value grammar, <value> type and browser implementations

± This is correct - the actual grammar we use to parse CSS is a bastardized
± version of Appendix G.  David's written a bunch of tests which we fail and will
± continue to do so until we fix our parser.

Seems like I made a good guess ^_^ I suppose the plan is to get rid of those issues before releasing Custom Properties, right? Hope this can be solved in all browsers rather quickly. Do FireFox/Opera also have some non-standard CSS parsers?



± Serialization is undefined. :/

It would be good to get this defined before CSS Custom Properties goes on (if not in a spec at least discussed among implementers just to avoid a situation where serialization is completely different in all browsers, that would be a mess).


 
± Yes, we don't keep around the original text, for good reason. But JSCSSP's
± serializer seems slightly wrong.  Unfortunately, it's in a way that doesn't
± matter for anything that isn't a custom property. ^_^

What do you think JSCSSP is doing slightly wrong exactly?

Received on Friday, 8 February 2013 10:28:15 UTC