- From: Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 19:54:58 -0400
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > calc(), @supports, etc. only care about whitespace to force you into > unambiguous situations in some cases. There's not really a *reason* > to force it - it's perfectly fine to just say that calc is "<number> > <sign> <number>" or whatever, and then have a non-normative note that > recommends whitespace around + and - signs to avoid them being eaten > by the token on either side. Same with @supports and avoiding > "(foo)and(bar)" because it parses as an and() function - you should be > able to say "(foo)and/**/(bar)" and have it work fine, as it tokenizes > correctly. I tend to agree -- this is the same situation as "a+++++b" in C, which is a syntax error even though there is a possible tokenization that makes it not a syntax error. CSS has some unfortunate¹ tokenization choices that make this more of a burden on the stylesheet author than it might be, but it's not enough of a problem to bother with more than "you need to put some whitespace there" informative notes. zw ¹ read "I wouldn't have done it that way if I'd been there at the time": FUNCTION being one token, for instance.
Received on Tuesday, 14 May 2013 23:55:21 UTC