- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 22:17:48 +0200
- To: Ted Hardie <hardie@qualcomm.com>
- Cc: Joe Hildebrand <joe@cursive.net>, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Ted Hardie wrote: > I think you're mistaking an ABNF change between 2396 and 2396bis for > an architectural point. If you go back to 1738, the predecessor to 2396, > the schemepart's inclusion of *xchar clearly allows zero according > to the rules of the BNF syntax it references from 822 (see 2.4 in > RFC 822). Ted, I was only mentioning that in 2001 (not 2002 as I realized) we found that the bare string "DAV:" isn't a legal URI according to RFC2396. This was discussed with Roy Fielding, and as a consequence RFC2396bis changes this. Anyway, this is really not relevant for BIND. BIND doesn't define any new namespaces in the "DAV:" scheme, it just puts more elements into the XML namespace named "DAV:", which is already defined in RFC2518. Thus there's IMHO nothing that needs to change in BIND. Best regards, Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Wednesday, 23 June 2004 16:18:29 UTC