Re: [apps-review] Apps Area considerations

Dave CROCKER <dhc@dcrocker.net> Tue, 27 September 2011 15:37 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: apps-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B22921F8AC9 for <apps-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 08:37:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.497
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.497 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.102, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WBWhe9MqU8MW for <apps-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 08:37:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A9D121F8AAF for <apps-review@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 08:37:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.7] (adsl-68-122-32-32.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [68.122.32.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p8RFdr6K014340 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <apps-review@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 08:39:58 -0700
Message-ID: <4E81EE40.2070401@dcrocker.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 08:39:44 -0700
From: Dave CROCKER <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: apps-review@ietf.org
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20110927080220.09eccc18@elandnews.com>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20110927080220.09eccc18@elandnews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Tue, 27 Sep 2011 08:39:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [apps-review] Apps Area considerations
X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: Apps Area Review List <apps-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-review>, <mailto:apps-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-review>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-review>, <mailto:apps-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 15:37:13 -0000

On 9/27/2011 8:29 AM, SM wrote:
>
> - ABNF and BNF
>
>    There wasn't any comment.


I've modified the entry for this to be a bit more careful and accurate, since 
RFC 822 refers to its form of BNF as 'augmented'...

However the focus of this entry is to highlight the need to have specs be 
careful to cite the form of BNF being used and I certainly agree with that.

However it's a bit ironic that the BNF-checking tool that is cited does not 
declare what version /it/ checks against...

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net