Re: [http-state] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6265 (3444)

Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> Mon, 07 January 2013 19:26 UTC

Return-Path: <derhoermi@gmx.net>
X-Original-To: http-state@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: http-state@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93D7C21F8A09 for <http-state@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 11:26:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.949
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.650, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1yFhpB9IMnqI for <http-state@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 11:26:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AF3621F88D6 for <http-state@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 11:26:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([10.1.76.33]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx002) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0LwCie-1SveXv2GeU-0184ps for <http-state@ietf.org>; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 20:26:09 +0100
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 07 Jan 2013 19:26:09 -0000
Received: from p57A1E271.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO netb.Speedport_W_700V) [87.161.226.113] by mail.gmx.net (mp033) with SMTP; 07 Jan 2013 20:26:09 +0100
X-Authenticated: #723575
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19HZqZeJDJHTq7RoOYI0rJc38mUpwy3BTvAZPDVFF DKjEYYQsDj1VVr
From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 20:26:10 +0100
Message-ID: <nv6me8t3u48coo5d3bsicj52hq2qpe4ufo@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
References: <20130106220249.48E80622E9@rfc-editor.org> <130ke8djdk8ki9a24j27urk9d263mc5d9o@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <CALaySJ+Jz5+OH=r1yJrSe=OA5ehNYf+KgRVwOFT_Mrnrb-zpig@mail.gmail.com> <ganle8pk0esfoolksmqt963vtjmog9bdp2@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <CALaySJJkAOn1AcvRqNmRRLeQukPYyT9VJE51XWRj2hiysLxqNg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJJkAOn1AcvRqNmRRLeQukPYyT9VJE51XWRj2hiysLxqNg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: http-state@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [http-state] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6265 (3444)
X-BeenThere: http-state@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discuss HTTP State Management Mechanism <http-state.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/http-state>, <mailto:http-state-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/http-state>
List-Post: <mailto:http-state@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:http-state-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/http-state>, <mailto:http-state-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 19:26:12 -0000

* Barry Leiba wrote:
>>>>>Corrected Text
>>>>>--------------
>>>>>path-value        = * <any CHAR except CTLs or ";">
>>>>>extension-av      = * <any CHAR except CTLs or ";">

>> Something like
>>
>>   path-value        = *av-octet
>>   extension-av      = *av-octet
>>   av-octet          = <any CHAR except CTLs or ";">

>The first seems fine, but why do you think it's better than what the
>errata suggests?  I don't seen any advantage (or disadvantage) either
>way.

It seems strange and confusing to me to mix the informal prose with the
formal ABNF syntax; I rather think of them as

  placeholder = <this rule is not expressed in ABNF here>

so I expect the right-hand side to either be only a prose value or to be
free of prose values. I am not aware of encountering counter-examples in
the wild (except being confused by RFC 3986's `path-empty = 0<pchar>`).
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/