<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE bugzilla SYSTEM "https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/page.cgi?id=bugzilla.dtd">

<bugzilla version="5.0.4"
          urlbase="https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/"
          
          maintainer="sysbot+bugzilla@w3.org"
>

    <bug>
          <bug_id>15273</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2011-12-19 23:43:55 +0000</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>Are @keyframes defined inside @media valid?</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2012-07-09 20:12:57 +0000</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>1</classification_id>
          <classification>Unclassified</classification>
          <product>CSS</product>
          <component>Animations</component>
          <version>unspecified</version>
          <rep_platform>All</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>All</op_sys>
          <bug_status>RESOLVED</bug_status>
          <resolution>WONTFIX</resolution>
          
          
          <bug_file_loc></bug_file_loc>
          <status_whiteboard>[medium]</status_whiteboard>
          <keywords></keywords>
          <priority>P2</priority>
          <bug_severity>normal</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>---</target_milestone>
          
          
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter name="Sylvain Galineau">sylvaing</reporter>
          <assigned_to name="Dean Jackson">dino</assigned_to>
          <cc>cmarrin</cc>
    
    <cc>eoconnor</cc>
    
    <cc>smfr</cc>
          
          <qa_contact name="This bug has no owner yet - up for the taking">dave.null</qa_contact>

      

      

      

          <comment_sort_order>oldest_to_newest</comment_sort_order>  
          <long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>61797</commentid>
    <comment_count>0</comment_count>
    <who name="Sylvain Galineau">sylvaing</who>
    <bug_when>2011-12-19 23:43:55 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Chrome currently says yes. While I recall that error recovery rules now allow what comes after a nested at-rule to be parsed, I&apos;m not sure whether Chrome&apos;s behavior is conformant, or should be.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>64600</commentid>
    <comment_count>1</comment_count>
    <who name="Sylvain Galineau">sylvaing</who>
    <bug_when>2012-02-26 01:27:05 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>I suspect css-mediaqueries and/or css-conditionals would define this.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>69746</commentid>
    <comment_count>2</comment_count>
    <who name="Sylvain Galineau">sylvaing</who>
    <bug_when>2012-07-09 20:12:57 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Whether @keyframes is valid inside another construct is really up to the module defining that construct. css3-animations should not define what is valid/invalid inside @media.</thetext>
  </long_desc>
      
      

    </bug>

</bugzilla>