IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: ABNF sets and sequences

kaih@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen) Wed, 12 July 2000 18:33 UTC

Received: from cs.utk.edu (CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA07651 for <drums-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Jul 2000 14:33:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id OAA18890; Wed, 12 Jul 2000 14:32:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by cs.utk.edu (bulk_mailer v1.13); Wed, 12 Jul 2000 14:32:41 -0400
Received: by cs.utk.edu (cf v2.9s-UTK) id OAA18853; Wed, 12 Jul 2000 14:32:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from khms.westfalen.de (marvin@localhost) by cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id OAA18810; Wed, 12 Jul 2000 14:32:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from khms.westfalen.de (62.158.129.68 -> p3E9E8144.dip.t-dialin.net) by cs.utk.edu (smtpshim v1.0); Wed, 12 Jul 2000 14:32:37 -0400
Received: from root by khms.westfalen.de with local-bsmtp (Exim 3.12 #1) id 13CRJ1-0007jz-02 (Debian); Wed, 12 Jul 2000 20:32:23 +0200
Received: by khms.westfalen.de (CrossPoint v3.12d.kh5 R/C435); 12 Jul 2000 20:30:33 +0200
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 19:39:00 +0200
From: kaih@khms.westfalen.de
To: drums@cs.utk.edu
Message-ID: <7hiBWiPXw-B@khms.westfalen.de>
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.20000711173432.00c043e0@mail.bayarea.net>
Subject: Re: ABNF sets and sequences
X-Mailer: CrossPoint v3.12d.kh5 R/C435
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Organization: Organisation? Me?! Are you kidding?
References: <4.3.2.20000711173432.00c043e0@mail.bayarea.net>
X-No-Junk-Mail: I do not want to get *any* junk mail.
Comment: Unsolicited commercial mail will incur an US$100 handling fee per received mail.
X-Fix-Your-Modem: +++ATS2=255&WO1
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:drums-request@cs.utk.edu?Subject=unsubscribe>

dcrocker@brandenburg.com (Dave Crocker)  wrote on 11.07.00 in <4.3.2.20000711173432.00c043e0@mail.bayarea.net>:

> With respect to draft-ietf-drums-msg-fmt-07.txt , there seems to be a
> problem:
>
> >message         =       (fields / obs-fields)   [CRLF body]
> >
> >fields          =       *(trace
> >                           *(resent-date /
> >                            resent-from /
> >                            resent-sender /
> >                            resent-to /
> >                            resent-cc /
> >                            resent-bcc /
> >                            resent-id))
> >                         *(orig-date /
> >                         from /
> >                         sender /
> >                         reply-to /
> >                         to /
> >                         cc /
> >                         bcc /
> >                         message-id /
> >                         in-reply-to /
> >                         references /
> >                         subject /
> >                         comments /
> >                         keywords /
> >                         optional-field)
>
> does NOT fully show the non-ordering that is cited in:
>
> >....  So from a programmer viewpoint 822bis is heading in exactly the
> >right direction -- combine the *(a / b / c) unordered-list syntax with a
> >table of additional restrictions.
>
> or did I miss something?

Yes. You missed the enclosing *( ), or at least the implications thereof.

> It looks as if, for example, the syntax requires trace information to
> precede the From field.

No.


MfG Kai

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email