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

Re: #173: CR and LF in chunk extension values

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 16:29:05 +0200
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Message-Id: <1251210545.31991.202.camel@henriknordstrom.net>
tis 2009-08-25 klockan 14:47 +0200 skrev Julian Reschke:

> > So imho quoted-pair should be
> > 
> >     quoted-text = %x09 / %x20-%x7E / obs-text
> >                 ; WSP / VCHAR / obs-text
> >     quoted-pair = "\" qchar	
> > 
> > to match the use of *TEXT in 2616, making comments and quoted strings
> > all fit within *TEXT as those constructs is only used in detailed forms
> > which should be a subset of the more generic *TEXT.
> 
> "qchar" being...?

A typo

    quoted-pair = "\" quoted-text

> > If you look closely you'll notice the quoted-text and field-contents
> > definitions above are equal. Perhaps a common term should be defined for
> > that similar to the *TEXT element used in 2616. There is probably more
> > places where using said term would make sense. And sorry, no I do not
> > have a good suggested BNF name for this construct.. TEXT would be
> > confusing with 2616 and text in lower case too generic to be used in
> > describing text. general-text?
> > ...
> 
> "characters"?

Is WSP and obs-text characters? Other than that no opinion either way..

> Anyway, my take away from your analysis is: "yes, CTLs need to be 
> disallowed both in comments and quoted-text", right?

Yes. CTLs should be disallowed in quoted-pair except for those included
in WSP (HT).

Regards
Henrik
Received on Tuesday, 25 August 2009 14:29:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:08 GMT