- From: Mike Brown <mike@skew.org>
- Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 23:38:26 -0700 (MST)
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Cc: Ray Merkert <rmerkert@alphatech.com>, uri@w3.org
Roy T. Fielding wrote: > I have tried various ways of explaining it in the text and finally > went back to multiple definitions of path, though I hope I've done > a better job of disambiguating the different cases than I did for > 2396. I would appreciate it if the grammar-driven parsing experts > could have a look at > > http://gbiv.com/protocols/uri/rev-2002/rfc2396bis.html (or .xml) > > and see if the new ABNF rules work (I've already tested them with > the abnf.c tool). All but one of my test cases for a regex-based parser are passing with the new grammar, using trailing '?'s instead of the weird path-empty expression. The URI reference '::' (without the quotes): permitted or not? It was permitted in the previous drafts, but maybe that was an oversight? -Mike
Received on Friday, 26 March 2004 01:38:23 UTC