Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Review request for Server-Timing (#188)

@mnot: 

> - Omit the header field-name and colon from the Server-Timing rule.
> - Reference RFC7230, Section 7 for the # extension.
> - Reference RFC5234 for ABNF.

👍 (https://github.com/w3c/server-timing/pull/31)

> - metric allows OWS around the "=", unlike RFC7231 parameter. Is this intentional?

`parameter` in RFC7231 looks to be specific to `Accept` and `Content-Type`. I thought it made sense to allow the optional whitespace for readability. But I'm not finding any prior art for OWS around equal signs... I don't have a problem removing it from spec, but I'd think browsers would still want to allow. 

I dug into `parameter` for `Content-Type` a little further, and every modern browser supports WS before and after the "=" (excepting Firefox which supports WS after, but not before, the `=`) 

> - metric-value allows an empty value (e.g., "foo="); is this intentional? If so, it should be called out in prose.

I see what you mean, this happened because of a [recent change](https://github.com/w3c/server-timing/commit/cfc40af35655c57dca9f188c063db34c7edbe37a). `metric-value` is the way it is to allow for `foo=.25` (no leading "0"). `foo=` does not hold more meaning than `foo`, which we need to be legal. Is there a way you know of in ABNF to tighten that up?

> - Is using non-ascii characters in metric-name and/or description a desired use? If so, you need to define an encoding, e.g., RFC5987bis.

I could have this wrong, but I _think_ both _are_ just ascii, which is what we want. for `metric-name`:
`metric-name` is a `token` [(link)](https://w3c.github.io/server-timing/#the-server-timing-header-field)
`token` resolves to a`tchar`, which resolves to asciis, `DIGIT`s, and `ALPHA`s [(link)](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230#section-3.2.6)
`ALPHA`s are just `A-Z / a-z` [(link)](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5234#appendix-B.1)





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/188#issuecomment-326690418