W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: suggestions for examples and explication wrt ABNF and header fields in draft-ietf-httpbis-p1

From: =JeffH <Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 08:40:49 -0800
Message-ID: <4B4DF791.4090204@KingsMountain.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, IETF HTTP WG <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
 > RFC2616 said:
 >
 > "The grammar described by this specification is word-based. Except where
 > noted otherwise, linear white space (LWS) can be included between any
 > two adjacent words (token or quoted-string), and between adjacent words
 > and separators, without changing the interpretation of a field." --
 > <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2616.html#basic.rules>

yes, good catch.


 > So what got lost is the explanation word = token / quoted-string.
 > Apparently we need to resurrect that part.

If you want to retain those two instances of using "word" rather than "token", 
then yes, I agree you'd want to resurrect (in some way) that portion of 2616 
you quoted. I think you'd want to be sure include the parenthetical "..two 
adjacent words (token or quoted-string).." that indicates that what the prose 
is referring to as a "word" is either a token or a quoted-string in the ABNF.

=JeffH
Received on Wednesday, 13 January 2010 16:41:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:16 GMT