W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: Implicit *LWS

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2008 17:41:51 +0200
To: Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@googlemail.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1207582911.3087.59.camel@HenrikLaptop>

mån 2008-04-07 klockan 13:47 +0100 skrev Geoffrey Sneddon:

> Over the past few days I've been looking over RFC2616, and I've found  
> implicit *LWS to be very troublesome. Is this planned to be got rid of  
> when moving to ABNF?

Yes, it's one of the changes on the ABNF table..

> - It is defined as being between words and words, or words and  
> separators, but it never defines what a word or a separator is. Is  
> token a word? Is "foo" a word? Is "/" a separator?

The same paragraph defines word as "token or quoted-string", kind of..

separators is defined, but does not really match actual use..

> - There are all kinds of places where I think it is allowed (pending  
> the above) where it really shouldn't be. As far as I can see, CRLF =  
> CR *LWS LF (where the *LWS is implicit).

How? Neither CR or LF is a word/token/quoted-string...

> There are things like this throughout the specification, and for that  
> reason, I'd much prefer to see implicit *LWS got rid of, and it  
> explicitly defined where it is allowed. Sure, it means having *LWS all  
> over the place, but at least it is unambiguous.

Yes.

Regards
Henrik
Received on Monday, 7 April 2008 15:44:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:46 GMT