- From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
- Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 19:19:12 +0100
- To: www-style@w3.org
Le 04/09/2013 18:48, Lea Verou a écrit :
> On Sep 4, 2013, at 20:10, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm not a fan of the syntax, particularly when you mix codepoint and
>> characters, like "a"-U+7F, which parses as STRING(a) IDENT(-U)
>> DIMENSION(+7, F) rather than the intended STRING(a) DELIM(-)
>> UNICODE-RANGE(U+7F). A function would work better, as
>> "unicode-range('a', u+7f)".
>
> We don’t have to allow combinations then. If people want to combine a
> character with a codepoint, they can always use the CSS syntax for
> codepoints in strings, doing things like "a"-"\7F". Adding a function
> of that sort seems very verbose and ultimately unnecessary.
I like this idea.
Since the 'unicode-range' descriptor already uses comma to separate
ranges, we don’t even need an hyphen and just have string separated by
optional whitespace. Maybe allow (unquoted) identifiers as well? The
syntax could look like this:
Current grammar:
Value: <urange> #
New grammar:
Value: [ <urange> | <string> <string>? ] #
Or:
Value: [ <urange> |
[ <string> | <ident> ] [ <string> | <ident> ]? ] #
… where strings and idents must have a code point length of one.
--
Simon Sapin
Received on Wednesday, 4 September 2013 18:19:38 UTC