- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 09:44:47 +1000
- To: "Frank Ellermann" <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>
- Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
I disagree; I've seen implementations produce empty elements, and "it's ugly" isn't a good enough reason to break them. That's not to say that we shouldn't discourage it. Also, we have an open issue about whether line folding should be disallowed; http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/77 On 25/05/2008, at 2:02 AM, Frank Ellermann wrote: > > Julian Reschke wrote: > >> Is there consensus for this? > > No. #-LWS has to be killed or obsoleted. ASCII art by commas > is only ridiculous, but "apparently empty lines" are dangerous. > Example, #x permits... > > ,,, , , ,,, <CRLF> > , , , , , <CRLF> > ,,, , , , ,,, <CRLF> > , , , , , , <CRLF> > ,,, ,,, ,,, <CRLF> > > ...and that's IMNSHO ugly. But it also permits... > > ,,,,,,,,,<CRLF> > <SP> <CRLF> > <HTAB> <CRLF> > ,,,,,,,,,<CRLF> > > ...and that is dangerous when applications don't get the subtle > difference between "really empty" <CRLF> and "apparently empty" > <SP><CRLF> or even <HTAB><CRLF> lines. > > The ABNF has to be very obvious what is permitted, and what is > obsoleted, without misguided attempts to hide these horrors in > any #-constructs. Yes, which is why we should address the LWS issue first. -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Saturday, 24 May 2008 23:45:29 UTC