Re: [abnf-discuss] Deviant form of ABNF in RFC 989/1049/1341/1521/2045/2397
Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com> Sun, 23 April 2023 22:06 UTC
Return-Path: <dcrocker@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: abnf-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: abnf-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FAFAC14CEFC for <abnf-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 15:06:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eryMFH2pccFZ for <abnf-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 15:06:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x72b.google.com (mail-qk1-x72b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72b]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53DACC14F74E for <abnf-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 15:06:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x72b.google.com with SMTP id af79cd13be357-74df951e897so185079185a.2 for <abnf-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 15:06:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1682287612; x=1684879612; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=tw1J4RIv6BK1VgNosuJdwvMe3jTvmZeDXYwml/0a/QU=; b=nnJoPfRiMfwwLMiZmOJy4d8CpcSxbmrOrE62HLpvLnVTBgcIe41WPvdZ60AHXJby3k /i6xjPdIeGLvJqdqD4SR/OYEm/ovdfuQsjeS4GmPVmPgUJvCD/htd3J5xmLUABMfvjo5 8Ngcbf8zfm2va5ptyyAuNmE4SjGUCojDYNdYbpzw/p1fVs7SY4SfC10VIUoTkO6gxTzD ii7pcFiqzgGxXBSwglQ5vMm2AtqhVQgQ4hCA19zhl/Y3fkP/N8EbSnxP17Gdum6IYV+G Vkoiz2QHdCiWUDjyxB+2blO2wnFzq2PWRDoSmUAztJrOQ5pZ4hjZB5+NsUVMLJvVjrDt 9aig==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1682287612; x=1684879612; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=tw1J4RIv6BK1VgNosuJdwvMe3jTvmZeDXYwml/0a/QU=; b=RSkjLqv2QEPbFPd22HXjK/XEsu+bMZ3Nza9W3HQqJHvW9QaHzrOlQ5F6rHEGFJUO5t i/N8liX/lkjWsTpqt21UH0XXDDpRv641yIDC6ycZvvv7YK2pRdk187mdFeabanjNiE+e 0i5ordWWCWeKPWwMVeaJGvLT4YBjb1PWxDFhsFPA9BAhWzBww5+b4S1ghJhGgy6I5st5 hmT+axGuRJAVG2OmqIP8PhGnxtjUad6D0sPfpJbixADBVdXtUFOzYow+nzS7W/YFGpXM 0KpaFULbL/CxC0VfsSspNPUoN4x7Qavau9ao8jfmnQFtZRTGqennvO6nKpLsgvHUJe9l 4Vog==
X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9eE03CiDT2WhVqyBs6Uku+ZeKzyF55DodAEe9Lpi2PLASF7+NgN 6vBK8wTrKJNTOHc2N2ihoPFXeoW0aHw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350bBaxsdHVLApu9sOi5oFFwkxbSPi/AkDPwDxmAdC9J62dwHiklmgZnSHZ5j2GRyW4BLkQ1i2Q==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:d67:b0:5f4:4e3d:2bee with SMTP id 7-20020a0562140d6700b005f44e3d2beemr22462289qvs.17.1682287611699; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 15:06:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.101.205.54] ([63.80.97.82]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ef7-20020a05620a808700b007486d9fa1d7sm3063647qkb.95.2023.04.23.15.06.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 23 Apr 2023 15:06:51 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <a422e000-dd9e-7f4f-1486-29b5754bd4d3@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2023 15:06:48 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.10.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, abnf-discuss@ietf.org
References: <1A81876F-C7E3-4060-8705-BC23CCF9D0D4@tzi.org>
From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1A81876F-C7E3-4060-8705-BC23CCF9D0D4@tzi.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/abnf-discuss/kL6GINZpmjIPfrE-ZNRtg1YKVlA>
Subject: Re: [abnf-discuss] Deviant form of ABNF in RFC 989/1049/1341/1521/2045/2397
X-BeenThere: abnf-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "General discussion about tools, activities and capabilities involving the ABNF meta-language" <abnf-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/abnf-discuss>, <mailto:abnf-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/abnf-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:abnf-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:abnf-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abnf-discuss>, <mailto:abnf-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2023 22:06:55 -0000
On 4/23/2023 2:42 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote: > Does anyone remember the history that made this alternative form appear, teeter on for a while, and then pretty much go away? > Was there any other difference apart from “:=“? I don't know anything about this variant. For those who need a wider context: Through the 1970s and 1980s, there were lots of variants of BNF. We did one for RFC733, continued into RFC822, and it happened to become popular with other folk. So, RFC822 got incorporated into all sorts of non-email specifications, to get it's form of ABNF. The later splitting out of the ABNF into a separate RFC was, really, just to make specific citation easier, rather than for technical reasons. But of course, since we had the hood up,... d/ -- Dave Crocker dcrocker@gmail.com mast:@dcrocker@mastodon.social 408.329.0791 Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter Information & Planning Coordinator American Red Cross dave.crocker2@redcross.org
- [abnf-discuss] Deviant form of ABNF in RFC 989/10… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [abnf-discuss] Deviant form of ABNF in RFC 98… Dave Crocker
- Re: [abnf-discuss] Deviant form of ABNF in RFC 98… Paul Overell