- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 17:45:01 +0100
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, fielding@gbiv.com, barryleiba@computer.org, presnick@qti.qualcomm.com, mnot@mnot.net, bjoern@hoehrmann.de, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
* 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/
Received on Saturday, 10 January 2015 16:45:39 UTC