- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 09:34:13 -0800
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: Dael Jackson <daelcss@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> wrote: > * Dael Jackson wrote: >>:lang() Issues >>-------------- >> >> <TabAtkins> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Dec/0177.html >> TabAtkins: Previously we resolved to allow asterisks in :lang(), >> but per my email (above) I think we shouldn't. The >> legacy language behavior for ident-ish things can stay, >> but as soon as you need an asterisk, which breaks ident >> parsing, we should require use of strings. >> TabAtkins: In general, terms defined from outside CSS are >> represented with strings, as it avoids parsing >> confusion. >> fantasai: I think problems with asterisks is something that will >> be very rare for authors to run into, but I don't have >> objections if y'all have a strong opinion. >> Florian: Mini-grammars not inside quotes tend to get painful >> eventually (see recent issues with unicode range), so I'm >> with tab >> plinss: So, any objections to requiring string? >> >> RESOLVED: Require quoting :lang() values as a string if they have >> asterisks. >> >> <SimonSapin> TabAtkins, so :lang() syntax is still `<ident> | >> <string>`? > > This does not seem to be answered in the minutes. :lang(\*-x) could make > the whole selector invalid (entire rule is dropped), but it could also > just match nothing, or the ident could still be interpreted as if it had > been a string, but validators ought to complain, or a similar variant. The actual change is going to be "must be <ident> or <string>", so you can definitely escape the asterisk if you feel like it. No need to get validators involved, it's fine, just weird and no one will do it. ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 15 January 2015 17:35:00 UTC