- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 15:49:35 +0200
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-15.html#rfc.section.3.2.p.8> says: "Historically, HTTP header field values could be extended over multiple lines by preceding each extra line with at least one space or horizontal tab octet (line folding). This specification deprecates such line folding except within the message/http media type (Section 10.3.1). HTTP/1.1 senders MUST NOT produce messages that include line folding (i.e., that contain any field-content that matches the obs-fold rule) unless the message is intended for packaging within the message/http media type. HTTP/1.1 recipients SHOULD accept line folding and replace any embedded obs-fold whitespace with a single SP prior to interpreting the field value or forwarding the message downstream." I think we have mismatch between ABNF and prose here. Consider "HTTP/1.1 senders MUST NOT produce messages that include line folding (i.e., that contain any field-content that matches the obs-fold rule)...." ..but.. OWS = *( [ obs-fold ] WSP ) ; "optional" whitespace obs-fold = CRLF ...which is ok-ish, because the only way to get obs-fold into the field is to have trailing WSP. But... "HTTP/1.1 recipients SHOULD accept line folding and replace any embedded obs-fold whitespace with a single SP..." indicates that a sequence of obs-fold WSP should be replaced by SP WSP Wasn't the intention to replace the sequence by a single SP? Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 27 July 2011 13:50:08 UTC