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

Re: allowable characters in token as used in parameter ABNF

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 17:34:11 +0100
To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>
Message-ID: <op.u7nxm9es64w2qv@annevk-t60>
On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 17:25:46 +0100, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>  
wrote:
> Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> Well, I don't really see the drawback in allowing more bytes by default.
>
> ...by default in what?

The generic value production.


>> It seems that you always need a specific parser at some point except  
>> for headers that take fixed token values, but for those being more  
>> lenient
>
> so let's s/parser/parser component/

Sure.


>> is not an issue. Therefore I was wondering whether a concept of generic  
>> parser is even used/needed in implementations today. Or maybe they have  
>> such a concept, but it already is far more lenient so it can also cope  
>> with e.g. Link and Cookie-related headers. And maybe Authorization? And
>
> You tell me. What does Opera do here?

Yngve is in a better position to answer that I think.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Friday, 5 February 2010 16:34:51 GMT

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