- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 14:09:59 -0800
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Mar 6, 2011, at 9:53 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 06.03.2011 12:19, Julian Reschke wrote: >> Hi, >> >> see <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/280>...: >> >> Section 2.3 of draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload: >> >> parameter = attribute "=" value >> attribute = token >> value = word >> >> I believe we need OWS around "=". >> >> (The grammar didn't change from 2616, but we 2616 had implied LWS...). >> >> Best regards, Julian > > Philip Jägenstedt points out on the HTML WG mailing list that RFC 2616 said in the prose: > > "Linear white space (LWS) MUST NOT be used between the type and subtype, nor between an attribute and its value." > > So what HTTPbis says in P3 is consistent with that. > > That being said, RFC 5987, RFC 5988 and the Content Disposition draft disagree with this, and *do* allow linear white space (RFC 5987 puts it in explicitly, RFC 5988 inherits 2616 ABNF rules, and so does C-D). > > I see two ways out: > > - recognize that 5987 and 5988 are wrong, raise errata, and fix C-D before it goes to the IESG > > - recognize that 5987 and 5988 reflect common usage, and potentially fix it in HTTPbis I do not know of any such usage, let alone common. ....Roy
Received on Monday, 7 March 2011 22:10:28 UTC