W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: Issue 163, was: Meaning of invalid but well-formed dates

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 19:48:40 +0200
Message-ID: <4A047078.2080109@gmx.de>
To: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
CC: 'Geoffrey Sneddon' <foolistbar@googlemail.com>, 'HTTP Working Group' <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Brian Smith wrote:
> Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
>> On 8 May 2009, at 18:08, Brian Smith wrote:
>>
>>> I don't get why s-Mon, s-Jan, l-Mon, etc. are named productions
>>> (instead of
>>> unnamed alternatives like in RFC 5023), but that is not new to this
>>> change.
>> Case sensitivity. Plain strings in ABNF are case insensitive.
> 
> I meant, why not write them like this:
> 
>   day-name = %x4D.6F.6E  ; "Mon", case-sensitive
>            / %x54.75.65  ; "Tue", case-sensitive
>            / %x57.65.64  ; "Wed", case-sensitive
>            / %x54.68.75  ; "Thu", case-sensitive
>            / %x46.72.69  ; "Fri", case-sensitive
>            / %x53.61.74  ; "Sat", case-sensitive
>            / %x53.75.6E  ; "Sun", case-sensitive
> 
> It's not really a big deal, but I think this way is clearer.

I was going to agree, but then realized that we would loose clarity in 
the collected ABNF (which doesn't contain the comments).

BR, Julian
Received on Friday, 8 May 2009 17:49:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:02 GMT