- From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 19:11:29 +0000
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>
- CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, www International <www-international@w3.org>
[putting back the cc to www-international, so that the i18n community and our tracker sees this] This wording is a significant improvement. Thanks. RI PS: I'm curious, however, about why the parsing of the initial bytes is so draconian in requiring specific quotes and exactly one space. HTML5 doesn't require that, afaict. On 15/01/2014 22:18, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com> wrote: >> I think the text in the note is good, but the lead-in still gives the >> wrong impression. Let me try again. >> >> | The @charset rule is an artifact of the algorithm used to [determine >> | the fallback encoding] for the stylesheet. That algorithm looks for >> | a specific byte sequence as the very first few bytes in the file, which >> | has the syntactic form of an @-rule. Those bytes are not discarded >> | from the input, whether or not they influence the encoding actually >> | used to process the stylesheet. Therefore, the stylesheet parser >> | recognizes an @-rule with the general syntax >> | >> | <at-charset-rule> = @charset <string> ; >> | >> | and, for backward compatibility, includes it in the object model for >> | the stylesheet. Modifying, adding, or removing an @charset rule via >> | the object model has no effect (in particular it does *not* cause the >> | stylesheet to be rescanned in a different encoding). >> | >> | The @charset rule is invalid if it is not the very first, top-level >> | rule in the stylesheet, but it is parsed according to the normal >> | syntax for @-rules, which are less restrictive than the algorithm that >> | determines the fallback encoding. Therefore, an @charset rule may >> | appear in the object model even if it was ignored by that algorithm. >> | (For instance, if it was written with extra whitespace or with single >> | rather than double quotes.) > > Ooh, I like this wording. Stealing it! > > ~TJ > >
Received on Wednesday, 22 January 2014 19:12:00 UTC