Re: Prefer Draft Feedback

On 2011-12-03 00:01, James Snell wrote:
> All,
>
> I would like to take a quick moment to solicit feedback on the current
> version of the HTTP Prefer Header specification:
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-snell-http-prefer-04
>
> The draft should be pretty well self-explanatory. There are some
> highly tentative pieces included in this draft that may likely be
> removed in a future iteration. They have been included now primarily
> for the purpose of soliciting feedback on their overall utility.
> ...

Will review.

One thing I already noticed is that the spec does the same mistake most 
other header field definitions make; it defines an extensible syntax but 
then special cases the header field it defines itself.

Parsing should be uniform.

So,

- if you take value-less tokens, you need to state whether

   x

   x=

   x=""

are equivalent or not.

- if values can be tokens or quoted-strings, you should state that both 
notations are equivalent, and are allowed everywhere, so are

   priority=100

and

   priority="100"

the same thing?

Best regards, Julian