34616 - underscores should not be allowed in CSS identifiers

Status: VERIFIED WORKSFORME

(Core :: CSS Parsing and Computation, defect, P3)

Description

[David Baron :dbaron: (⌚️UTC-4, no longer working on Mozilla)]

DESCRIPTION:  According to the CSS1 and CSS2 grammar, underscores should not be
allowed directly within identifiers (they must be escaped).  Mozilla is
currently allowing them within identifiers (but not at the start).  Unless this
is going to be changed in CSS3, this should probably be fixed, at least for
strict mode.

STEPS TO REPRODUCE:
 * load http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/css/test/xmltypesel

ACTUAL RESULTS:
 * the fourth test line is red

EXPECTED RESULTS:
 * it should be black

DOES NOT WORK CORRECTLY ON:
 * Linux, mozilla, 2000-04-05-08-M15

Comment 1

[David Baron :dbaron: (⌚️UTC-4, no longer working on Mozilla)]

Attachment: additional testcase

Comment 2

[rickg]

non-essential for m16

Comment 3

[ekrock's old account (dead)]

Although we would ideally like to fix this for RTM, enforcing correct usage 
(fixing this bug) is a lower priority than enabling correct usage (which we do 
already in this case). Since there are other bugs where we're currently not yet 
enabling correct usage, we can FUTURE and relnote this if time runs out.

Comment 4

[Pierre Saslawsky]

Who did fix that without telling me :-) ? David? Marc?
Marking WorksForMe.

Interestingly enough, last week I closed as Invalid a bug filed by someone who 
was complaining that underscores were not supported.

Comment 5

[Marc Attinasi]

I thing David fixed this a month or more ago when he did some CSSParser 
reworking. I'm not positive, but that is my guess. Do you agree, David?

Comment 6

[David Baron :dbaron: (⌚️UTC-4, no longer working on Mozilla)]

No, Marc, you fixed this in a checkin on May 4, checking in a patch contributed 
by [e-mail] .

Comment 7

[Marc Attinasi]

Yup - David's right. It was bug 38179. That was a dup of this one.

Comment 8

[Christine Hoffman]

Adding 'verifyme' keyword

Comment 9

[Hixie (not reading bugmail)]

Netscape's standard compliance QA team reorganised itself once again, so taking 
remaining non-tables style bugs. Sorry about the spam. I tried to get this done 
directly at the database level, but apparently that is "not easy because of the 
shadow db", "plus it screws up the audit trail", so no can do...

Comment 10

[Hixie (not reading bugmail)]

This bug went from being a valid NEW bug to being a valid ASSIGNED bug to being
a DUPLICATE bug to being a FIXED bug to being an INVALID bug.

However, VERIFIED that it is WORKSFORME in that David's currently invalid 
testcase would pass if it was fixed.