On 2012-08-06 13:08, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu wrote:
(12/07/31 20:06), Arthur Barstow wrote:
On 7/19/12 11:15 PM, ext Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu wrote:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012JanMar/thread#msg518
I completely missed that comment of yours when you originally sent it,
which is why I didn't address it back then.
Lachlan, Kenny - what is the status of this comment (f.ex. does the spec
need to be changed)?
I think this is a very minor issue, and it has a simple workaround -
mark it as undefined. However, if Lachlan doesn't feel like paying extra
fee for versionning (what Anne calls "make work") or he thinks having
"undefined"s in a spec significantly lowers the quality, I think that's
fair enough and I suggest the way to move forward (if we really want to)
is to consider my comment as retracted (let's just do so if Lachlan
doesn't reply to this).
I'd rather find a way to address the issue. I've just been a bit busy
with other tasks for the last 2 weeks to look into this.
I'd like feedback from implementers about how best to address the issue.
The options I can think of:
1. Disallow all comments within the selector for this API. Throw
SyntaxError when they are used.
2. Allow comments, but define that unclosed comments should throw a
SyntaxError.
3. Allow comments, define that unclosed comments are silently ignored.
--
Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
http://lachy.id.au/
http://www.opera.com/
