- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Thu, 02 May 2019 06:32:46 +0000
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
-------- In message <ba411a25-c389-3470-5cf3-8abd0779da90@gmx.de>, Julian Reschke writes : >Does this mean, that a definition like > > MyField = [ sh-list ] > >is an acceptable use of the syntax? (see ><https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/781#issue-426418064>). Your entire header would not be SH-parsable/compliant, because it fails the parsing under SH rules. However, if for some reason or other you cannot use SH anyway, it is certainly be a good and sensible way to minimize the amount of work for people producing a custom header-parser. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Thursday, 2 May 2019 06:33:11 UTC