- From: Roberto Polli <robipolli@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2022 15:28:48 +0100
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Hi Mark & al. Il giorno mer 16 feb 2022 alle ore 23:49 Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> ha scritto: > Yeah, that seems like a good idea. I've opened: > https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/1974 SF achieves the goal of associating types to each field part, but it relies on prose - which is subject to interpretation - to describe relations between all those parts. ABNF is limited to syntax, but it's formal and can be used to label single field parts and compose them... maybe we should identify some conventions to express those relations with SF too. An "exercise" in SF could be to express Accept-Encoding https://httpwg.org/http-core/draft-ietf-httpbis-semantics-latest.html#rfc.section.12.5.3 accordingly to https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/1974 without using abnf: which would be the result? Have a nice day, R.
Received on Thursday, 17 February 2022 14:29:12 UTC