- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2015 08:57:31 -0700
- To: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>
On 9 August 2015 at 00:31, Mike West <mkwst@google.com> wrote: > I'm trying to parse the `Prefer` ABNF (defined in > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7240#section-2). It says that `token` and > `word` are defined within Sections 3.2.1 and 3.2.4 of [RFC7230], but they > don't appear to actually be defined there. Can you point me to the correct > reference (I assume `token` is from > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230#section-3.2.6, but I can't find `word`)? That looks like a pretty serious erratum on 7240, which I have opened. The "word" rule is not defined in 7230 or even 2616. We might speculate that word = token / quoted-string, which I have, but all that means is that you probably shouldn't use it as a model.=. I think that Julian used a different example of the "canonical" header field syntax that you could use instead.
Received on Sunday, 9 August 2015 15:58:07 UTC