- From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
- Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 23:35:00 +0800
- To: Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>
- CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Le 19/05/2013 09:27, Zack Weinberg a écrit : >>> * 4. Unicode-range tokens may need a "valid" flag. I need to >>> cross-check the code in Gecko against the algorithm in this spec >>> carefully, but the definition of UNICODE-RANGE in CSS2.1 included >>> several forms that were semantically invalid. >> >> The parser in Syntax ended up only accepting valid unicode ranges >> (except that it does, technically, allow for ranges where the min is >> higher than the max). This is more restrictive than CSS 2.1, but it >> only fails to cover things that were invalid in the first place. > I will pay careful attention to this section when I go back through. Note that in addition to invalid ranges that make the declaration dropped, what css-syntax calls an "empty range" is either "invalid and ommited" or just "ommited". I’ll write in another thread so that css-fonts doesn’t here "invalid" in this case. Cheers, -- Simon Sapin
Received on Monday, 20 May 2013 15:35:34 UTC