Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7231 (4224)

* Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Notes
>> -----
>> The HTTP/1.1 RFCs define rules imported across documents using
>> prose rules for all rules except this one. This is an error
>> because RFC7231 does not mean to re-define the production rule.
>> ...
>
>The text is as intended; Appendix C has:
>
>> The rules below are defined in [RFC7230]:
>>
>>   BWS           = <BWS, see [RFC7230], Section 3.2.3>
>>   OWS           = <OWS, see [RFC7230], Section 3.2.3>
>>   RWS           = <RWS, see [RFC7230], Section 3.2.3>
>>   URI-reference = <URI-reference, see [RFC7230], Section 2.7>
>>   absolute-URI  = <absolute-URI, see [RFC7230], Section 2.7>
>>   comment       = <comment, see [RFC7230], Section 3.2.6>
>>   field-name    = <comment, see [RFC7230], Section 3.2>
>>   partial-URI   = <partial-URI, see [RFC7230], Section 2.7>
>>   quoted-string = <quoted-string, see [RFC7230], Section 3.2.6>
>>   token         = <token, see [RFC7230], Section 3.2.6>

Appendix C should also have the corrected line

     method = <method, see [RFC7230], Section 3.1.1>

because the error is not importing `method`.

If `method` in a `request-line` is actually something different from
`method` in an `Allow` header, then RFC7231 should call `method` by a
different non-terminal name. As it is, you cannot make a single ABNF
file for all HTTP/1.1 ABNF because `method` is defined twice and there
may be differences between them explained only in prose.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
D-10243 Berlin · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
 Available for hire in Berlin (early 2015)  · http://www.websitedev.de/