Remove attrs limitation on style tag #53
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters. Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Closes #52 Style tags can actually have any amount of extra tags, so adding the scoped tags is just too limiting.
Owner Author
| @adriaanzon Until something can be done about #50 I think it's better to simply allow any kind of tags around the lang attr. I'm doing a PR in case you started something, in that case this can be closed, otherwise feel free to fix anything you want and merge it 🙂 |
Collaborator
| Yeah this is fine for the time being. I have improved the pattern by looking at vim's html syntax file. This even allows for newlines inside the tags. I'll also use these kind of patterns when I'm going to fix #50, eventually 👍 |
Owner Author
| Perfect! 👌 |
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit. This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code. Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed. Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes. Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch. Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit. Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported. You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion. Outdated suggestions cannot be applied. This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved. Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews. Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments. Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge. Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Style tags can actually have any amount of extra tags, so adding the
scoped tags is just too limiting.
Related to #52