Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

0.9.0 issues 'expected... but found' warnings for shorthand and expanded properties #219

Closed
ghost opened this issue Jan 4, 2012 · 6 comments

Comments

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jan 4, 2012

I updated CSSLint to 0.9.0 and started getting warnings like this:

styles.css
1: warning at line 2, col 2
Expected all of (<border-width>, <border-style>, <color>) but found 'none'.
 border: none;

styles.css
2: warning at line 3, col 2
Expected end of value but found 'inset'.
 box-shadow: 1px 20px 1px #5d6872 inset;

0.8.5 reports zero warnings for the same file.

Contrived sample file:

div {
 border: none;
 box-shadow: 1px 20px 1px #5d6872 inset;
}

The command I'm running:
$ rhino csslint-rhino.js styles.css

@nzakas
Copy link
Contributor

nzakas commented Jan 5, 2012

0.9.0 included some new validation logic that is apparently not quite up to par. I'll take a look.

@nzakas nzakas closed this as completed in a142000 Jan 5, 2012
@nzakas
Copy link
Contributor

nzakas commented Jan 5, 2012

Just pushed v0.9.1

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Jan 5, 2012

I see a few remaining issues with 0.9.1:

Expected one of (border-width) but found '1px'.
  border-bottom-width: 1px;

Expected one of (border-style) but found 'solid'.
  border-bottom-style: solid;

Expected <shadow> but found '#ccc 3px 3px 3px inset'.
  box-shadow: #ccc 3px 3px 3px inset;

@nzakas nzakas reopened this Jan 5, 2012
@nzakas
Copy link
Contributor

nzakas commented Jan 5, 2012

Hmm, validation is a lot harder than it looks.

@nzakas nzakas closed this as completed in 6b135a8 Jan 5, 2012
@nzakas
Copy link
Contributor

nzakas commented Jan 5, 2012

Just pushed 0.9.2. If you find other issues, please file a separate ticket (easier for us to track that way).

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Jan 5, 2012

Thanks for the fixes. 0.9.2 is working with all of my files now, but I'll definitely file any other validation issues I run into as separate tickets.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant