- From: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 20:23:42 -0700 (PDT)
- To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Tab Atkins wrote: > The two at-rules in the Fonts spec can be specified in a much > simpler and easier-to-read manner, now that I've defined rules for > rule grammars. I think what you've omitted here is that based on the new Syntax spec, these rules could be simplified. I'd really rather not do that at this stage, since it means a dependency on the Syntax spec which is unstable. Elika posted similar comments to the list [1]. I definitely agree that it would be nice to get rid of the parser gobbledygook from out specs (e.g. "F f|\\0{0,4}(46|66)(\r\n|[ \t\r\n\f])?") but until Syntax is stable and there is consensus around whatever changes it entails, I think we need to wait for higher levels for these sorts of changes. I also think if you toss the grammar bits in the @font-feature-values rule case you have to add more description to specify what's valid in a <declaration-list>. The grammar serves as a much more precise description I think. > The grammar for @font-face is: > > @font-face { <declaration-list> } > > The valid declarations inside a @font-face rule are the descriptors > defined in this specification to apply to @font-face. How does this avoid the fact that with !important has no role within @font-face rules? That's the reason the spec currently defines <descriptor-declaration>. In the context of descriptors it just becomes a term that invalidates the declaration? > The grammar for @font-feature-values is: > > @font-feature-values <'font-family'># { <rule-list> } > > The valid rules inside a @font-feature-values are <font-feature-rule>s: > > <font-feature-rule> = [@stylistic | @styleset | ...] { <declaration-list> } > > The declarations inside a <font-feature-rule> are descriptors. Any > descriptor name is valid. Revision 2: > > @font-feature-values <'font-family'># { <rule-list> } > > Sorry, mistake from an earlier edit. I meant: > > @font-feature-values <'font-family'> { <rule-list> } No, this doesn't work because generics can't be included and those would be included in <'font-family'>. Regards, John Daggett [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013May/0450.html
Received on Friday, 24 May 2013 03:24:10 UTC