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

On Thursday 2014-11-13 17:13 -0800, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> One significant change is that the <urange> production is much looser
> than the <unicode-range-token> parsing previously defined.  <urange>
> does not attempt to ensure that the refs have at most 6 digits (or 6
> total digits + question marks), as that would have made the speccing
> and implementation much more difficult.  While I was against the
> looser definition when it was a token, as a microsyntax (which is only
> recognized when it's specifically called for) I'm fine with it being a
> little loose.  This has no effect on its use in practice; it just
> means that you can write things like U+0000000 (7 digits) that weren't
> previously allowed.

Now that the draft has restored the 6-digit restriction, I think
that restriction should be mentioned in the introductory section
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-syntax/#urange rather than being hidden
only within http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-syntax/#urange-syntax .

-David

-- 
𝄞   L. David Baron                         http://dbaron.org/   𝄂
𝄢   Mozilla                          https://www.mozilla.org/   𝄂
             Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
             What I was walling in or walling out,
             And to whom I was like to give offense.
               - Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)