- From: Ross Patterson <Ross_Patterson@ns.reston.vmd.sterling.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jan 98 17:39:40 EST
- To: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
jg@pa.dec.com (Jim Gettys) writes: >> 15) (14.48) The production for <t-codings> doesn't allow "identity", but >> rule 3 seems to allow "identity;q=0". >> >Here's Henrik's clarification: >it is not that "identity" isn't allowed - the problem >is that chunked is special - due to backwards compatibility concerns. > >... I see where I got lost now. The production for <t-codings> allows "chunked" or <transfer-extension>, but I missed the fact that in this case, we use "-extension" to include choices defined in the spec. In all other cases we use "-extension" for extensions beyond the current spec and define current values in the BNF (viz. <accept-params>, <cache-response-directive> et al.) So while the BNF is technically correct, it deviates from normal usage in the rest of the spec. I can live with leaving <t-codings> as it is, but I wonder if others will also miss the subtly different use of "-extension" in transfer-extension. Ross Patterson Sterling Software, Inc. VM Software Division
Received on Monday, 26 January 1998 14:53:31 UTC