- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 18:20:30 +0200
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2012-06-15 01:40, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> ...
> I *think* the only point of disagreement here is whether this (i.e., how to parse "non-core" cc directives) is advisory ("ought to...") or a conformance requirement ("MUST...").
>
> I can't find anywhere else in our specs where we place conformance requirements on being able to parse multiple paths in the ABNF. Can you?
> ...
(I'm not totally sure what you mean by "multiple paths" here, but I'll
assume we're still talking about the quoted-string/token choice).
I would argue it's implicit in how the ABNF defined.
When the ABNF indicates that an extension parameter or directive uses
quoted-string / token
then, yes, this means recipients MUST support both.
Best regards, Julian
Received on Sunday, 17 June 2012 16:21:05 UTC