[css-syntax-3] url( followed by comment(s)

[cdoublev]

In Chrome and FF (at least), url(/**/"bg.jpg") is invalid, and url(/**/bg.jpg) serializes as url("/**/bg.jpg").

I could not find something equivalent to the following note from CSS2 in CSS Syntax 3:

COMMENT tokens do not occur in the grammar (to keep it readable), but any number of these tokens may appear anywhere outside other tokens.

Based on this note, I would expect url(/**/"bg.jpg") to be valid. However, according to this note (which may be usefull to reproduce in CSS Syntax 3, imo), also from CSS2, /**/bg.jpg must be seen as an invalid URL <ident>:

Note that COMMENT tokens cannot occur within other tokens: thus, "url(/*x*/pic.png)" denotes the URI "/*x*/pic.png", not "pic.png".

So I guess the first note does not apply anymore, ie. comment tokens can usually appear anywhere except in some places that you do not want to explicitly list.

And I cannot find any corresponding case on WPT.

If everything I said above is true and you think there is no need to clarify anything in CSS Syntax, this issue can be closed.

[dbaron]

In CSS2, url("foo.jpg") was a single URL token. In css-syntax-3 it is parsed as a function and is three tokens. This is a substantive change; I don't remember when it was made, and it sounds like there may not be tests for it, and that implementations have not updated to match it.

[tabatkins]

The change from the special url token to a standard function token was resolved on several years ago, if and only if the first substantive thing inside the parentheses is a string. Otherwise it continues to be parsed as the special-case url-token. (This allows us to handle additional arguments, which otherwise would require even more special parsing to keep in the url token syntax.)

Refreshing myself on the actual text, it appears that impls are in fact following the spec. After you see the url(, you scan forward until you stop seeing whitespace; if the next character is a " or ', you go ahead and emit the url( as a function token and parse as normal (leaving some whitespace behind, if needed, to ensure a ws token is emitted); otherwise you parse as a url token.

This means that, per spec, seeing the / that would normally start a comment actually triggers the "parse as a url token" behavior. And then in that algorithm, seeing a " is a parse error (it normally means you'd written something like url(foo"bar"), which is a mistake).

So yeah, impls match the spec. And I think the spec needs to stay as it is; comments are otherwise ambiguous syntax. In theory I could add more scan-ahead to see if the comment is closed and (after potentially more ws and comments) then I hit a quote character, but it would impose a little more parsing cost on impls to support a syntax that wasn't previous allowed anyway.

I no longer have an old impl around to test, but I suspect that url(/**/"foo") was probably always invalid, so the current behavior is consistent with that, too.

[tabatkins]

So in conclusion: yes, the spec handles both of these cases and impls are correctly implementing that behavior, and I think that behavior is probably the best overall, given the legacy weirdnesses of url() syntax that we have to continue supporting.