Re: [css-syntax] Removed <unicode-range-token>, please review

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 7:55 PM, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com> wrote:
> Tab Atkins wrote:
>> Let's back up, because I'm confused now.
>>
>> What, precisely, from the Syntax spec are you objecting to?
>
> The Syntax spec is defining <urange> which is already defined in the Fonts spec:
>
>   http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-syntax/#urange
>   http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-fonts/#urange-value
>
> The Fonts spec has this wording:
>
>   Each <urange> value is a UNICODE-RANGE token made up of a
>   "U+" or "u+" prefix followed by a codepoint range in one
>   of the three forms listed below.
>
> The much narrower question that I think we should be tackling is
> what in the sentence above needs to change if the UNICODE-RANGE
> token definition is removed.

What needs to change is replacing that sentence with the production
and algorithm I defined in the Syntax spec.

> I really don't think the answer should be to define part of the
> syntax in the Syntax module and another part in the Fonts spec.

Currently there's no need to define any of the syntax in the Fonts
spec; the entire <urange> production is defined in Syntax at the
moment.

Having it in Syntax maybe isn't the best idea, but I put it there
because it had to go *somewhere*, and it's similar to <anb>, in that
it's a specialty syntax that we introduced before we had a good grasp
of why we should use a consistent and simple tokenizer, and so is a
much more complicated production than normal.

I'm not opposed to moving that section into Fonts, if you want.  I
don't care; it doesn't *need* to be in Syntax.

~TJ

Received on Wednesday, 19 November 2014 06:22:14 UTC