- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 12:35:10 +0200
- To: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>
- Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Kari hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>, HTTP working group mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2016-10-11 11:57, Mike West wrote: > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de > <mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de>> wrote: > > On 2016-10-11 11:44, Mike West wrote: > > ... > I made this change because of a lint warning that the > `sane-cookie-date` > definition in the same block was too long. What's a reasonable > way of > marking both of these up consistently without overflowing the > allotted > width? > ... > > > This: > > -sane-cookie-date = rfc1123-date > - ; defined in [RFC2616], Section 3.3.1 > +sane-cookie-date = > + <rfc1123-date, defined in [RFC2616], Section 3.3.1> > > > SGTM, thanks. > > What about `domain-value` below: should we change that to something like > `<subdomain, defined in ...>` as well? It doesn't look like line-breaks > are valid inside `<...>`, so maybe the comments are the right option? > > -mike Oh, I missed that one. Right, line breaks in prose productions aren't allowed, so this is the only option. It may thus make sense to use that notation consistently...
Received on Tuesday, 11 October 2016 10:36:04 UTC