W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2014

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7231 (4031)

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 13:32:18 +0200
Message-ID: <53B14AC2.3040301@greenbytes.de>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, fielding@gbiv.com, barryleiba@computer.org, presnick@qti.qualcomm.com, mnot@mnot.net
CC: annevk@annevk.nl, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 2014-06-30 13:00, RFC Errata System wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7231,
> "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7231&eid=4031
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
>
> Section: 3.1.1.1
>
> Original Text
> -------------
> media-type = type "/" subtype *( OWS ";" OWS parameter )
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> media-type = type "/" subtype *( OWS ";" OWS [parameter] )
>
> Notes
> -----
> See the thread at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2011JulSep/0027.html
>
> Implementations are much more relaxed when it comes to parsing MIME types.
> ...

I agree that most (if not all) implementations likely can parse 
instances with empty parameters.

But I don't see how this makes the spec incorrect; it just defines 
what's valid (thus MUST be sent).

This is not an erratum but a change request, IMHO.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Monday, 30 June 2014 11:32:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:31 UTC