[Bug 16302] possible unnecessary insertion of U+0020 SPACE in mime type expression

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16302

--- Comment #3 from Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> 2012-03-10 19:31:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > RFC 2616's ABNF has "implied Linear Whitespace", see
> > <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2616.html#rfc.section.2.1>.
> > 
> > Compare the media type definition with:
> > <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload-18.html#media.types>
> 
> thanks for reminding me of that; i had looked for this but didn't find it;
> 
> in any case, I wonder why it is necessary to require the use of *optional*
> whitespace in this case where it is not specified in the two cases immediately
> above the one cited here:

It's not. It's a case of over-specification.

> (1) Let mime type be "application/xml" or "text/html" if Document is an HTML
> document, followed by ";charset=", followed by encoding.
> 
> (2) Let mime type be "text/plain;charset=UTF-8".
> 
> on the surface, this behavior appears to be inconsistent;
> 
> further, since this is effectively defining a serialization rule, i wonder how
> this relates to the "canonical form" of an "Internet media type";

That is about a canonical form of the *payload*, not the Content-Type header
field.

> unfortunately, the language about canonicalization in RFC2616 [1] and httpbis
> [2] does address this point adequately (nor does it address the case of
> multiple same-named parameters);
> 
> [1]
> http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2616.html#canonicalization.and.text.defaults
> [2]
> http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload-18.html#canonicalization.and.text.defaults

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Saturday, 10 March 2012 19:31:45 UTC