Re: Semantic meaning of double quotation marks delimiting quoted-string

Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
> Hi,
> Earlier today I posted 
> <>, and having discussed 
> it with various people, have concluded that it'd be best addressed by 
> RFC 2616bis.
> In short, the post raises the issue of the meaning of double quotes. If 
> you parse them out, you end up with Etag: W/"a" and Etag: "W/a" 
> equivalent. If you don't, you can end up with character sets such as 
> "UTF-8" (i.e., including the quotation marks) in headers like 
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset="UTF-8". What is the expected behaviour 
> for quoted-string (or, if need be, for each and every specification that 
> uses quoted-string)?
> ...

The simple answer is: the double quotes are part of the entity tag. So a 
response header such as

	ETag: x

would simply be invalid and should be ignored.

Best regards, Julian

(PS: I wouldn't be opposed to making that more obvious)

Received on Sunday, 28 October 2007 18:32:56 UTC