W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2011

Content-Disposition: LWS in parameter ABNF; was: ISSUE-280: whitespace in parameter syntax?

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 18:53:06 +0100
Message-ID: <4D73CA02.3090804@gmx.de>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 06.03.2011 12:19, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Hi,
>
> see <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/280>...:
>
> Section 2.3 of draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload:
>
> parameter = attribute "=" value
> attribute = token
> value = word
>
> I believe we need OWS around "=".
>
> (The grammar didn't change from 2616, but we 2616 had implied LWS...).
>
> Best regards, Julian

Philip Jägenstedt points out on the HTML WG mailing list that RFC 2616 
said in the prose:

"Linear white space (LWS) MUST NOT be used between the type and subtype, 
nor between an attribute and its value."

So what HTTPbis says in P3 is consistent with that.

That being said, RFC 5987, RFC 5988 and the Content Disposition draft 
disagree with this, and *do* allow linear white space (RFC 5987 puts it 
in explicitly, RFC 5988 inherits 2616 ABNF rules, and so does C-D).

I see two ways out:

- recognize that 5987 and 5988 are wrong, raise errata, and fix C-D 
before it goes to the IESG

- recognize that 5987 and 5988 reflect common usage, and potentially fix 
it in HTTPbis

Feedback appreciated,

Julian
Received on Sunday, 6 March 2011 17:53:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:37 GMT