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

Re: Issue 194: restricting allowed characters in quoted-pair

From: Sam Johnston <samj@samj.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 13:58:54 +0100
Message-ID: <21606dcf0909250558r58fecd0fv8a4a464f2e8a85e@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>wrote:

> Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
>> ons 2009-09-16 klockan 16:34 +1000 skrev Mark Nottingham:
>>> So, strict BNF with a note in prose that old implementations may quote
>>>  other characters? Works for me.
>> Usually this kind of things is done the other way around. Open BNF with
>> restrictions in prose on what may be produced. Or if one wants to go the
>> long way by introducing "obsolete/old" BNF constructs for stuff which is
>> should not be produced but still accepted by parsers for legacy reasons.
>> Notes in prose should not require parsers to go outside the BNF.
> OK, for now I have only made the change disallowing non-HTAB control
> characters in quoted-pair (<
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/696>).
> I have not yet added any prose about recommending not to use quotes when
> not needed. With respect to that, we need to decide:
> - whether that's purely advisory or a requirement (SHOULD?), I lean to the
> former, and
> - where exactly to state it, as quoted-pair is used both inside
> quoted-string and comment, and the characters that need escaping thus
> differ; one way to fix this would be to change the ABNF so "comment" gets
> it's own quoted-cpair rule.

I would say implementations SHOULD NOT use quotes where not required but
MUST always accept them.

Received on Friday, 25 September 2009 12:59:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:51 UTC