- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@liege.ICS.UCI.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 03 Jul 1996 13:13:25 -0700
- To: Klaus Weide <kweide@tezcat.com>
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
> The syntax for the Warning response-header, in the case of a character > set different from ISO-8859-1, conflicts with RFC 1522 as clarified > by draft-ietf-822ext-mime-hdrs-00.txt. If HTTP/1.1 is meant to allow > encoded-words in a quoted-string, this should be clearly identified > as a deviation from the rules in RFC 1522 and its successor. Unless otherwise specified, HTTP is defined by the HTTP specification (which has its own BNF for quoted-string) and not by RFC 1522, primarily because of the moving target of MIME and policy differences with RFC 1522. Nevertheless, I did try to avoid inconsistencies. So, the answer to your question is that either draft-ietf-822ext-mime-hdrs-00 should change to avoid overspecifying the protocol (what it is doing in the bit you included, since quoted-string will be interpreted by the field value parser (as opposed to the message parser) and thus is indeed capable of consisting of encoded-words), or to change http-v11-spec-05 such that it defines both quoted-string and quoted-text, with the former reverting to the old MIME definition. My preference is to avoid overspecifying MIME, but Ned may have a better idea about why such a restriction was considered necessary in the first place. ...Roy T. Fielding Department of Information & Computer Science (fielding@ics.uci.edu) University of California, Irvine, CA 92717-3425 fax:+1(714)824-4056 http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 1996 13:23:18 UTC