You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
If decl’s name is a custom property name string, then set decl’s original text to the segment of the original source text string corresponding to the tokens of decl’s value.
Otherwise, if decl’s value contains a top-level simple block with an associated token of <{-token>, and also contains any other non- value, return nothing. (That is, a top-level {}-block is only allowed as the entire value of a non-custom property.)
The issue lies in that there's two "otherwise" there (emphasis mine), both of which are conditional, meaning -- in plain language -- what if a declaration's name is not [an ASCII case-insensitive match] for "unicode-range"? What should a compliant parser do then? It's effectively a case of a missing "fallthrough" (default) behaviour specification, the way I see it. An omission of sorts?
Reading this with a different pair of (fresher) eyes, I understand the implication is that if neither of the clauses apply, the parser should "do nothing", but I suppose a remaining issue would be that there's actually several places in the spec. elsewhere which explicitly mention "do nothing", so lack of such explicit "do nothing" is somewhat of an inconsistency.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Under list of steps described by 5.5.6 "Consume a declaration", point 8 says:
The issue lies in that there's two "otherwise" there (emphasis mine), both of which are conditional, meaning -- in plain language -- what if a declaration's name is not [an ASCII case-insensitive match] for "unicode-range"? What should a compliant parser do then? It's effectively a case of a missing "fallthrough" (default) behaviour specification, the way I see it. An omission of sorts?
Reading this with a different pair of (fresher) eyes, I understand the implication is that if neither of the clauses apply, the parser should "do nothing", but I suppose a remaining issue would be that there's actually several places in the spec. elsewhere which explicitly mention "do nothing", so lack of such explicit "do nothing" is somewhat of an inconsistency.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: