Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7231 (6019)

[Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>]

On 16.03.2020 12:10, RFC Errata System wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7231,
> "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6019
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Michael Osipov <[e-mail]>
>
> Section: 3.1.1.1
>
> Original Text
> -------------
>   A parameter value that matches the token production can be
>     transmitted either as a token or within a quoted-string.  The quoted
>     and unquoted values are equivalent.  For example, the following
>     examples are all equivalent, but the first is preferred for
>     consistency:
>
>       text/html;charset=utf-8
>       text/html;charset=UTF-8
>       Text/HTML;Charset="utf-8"
>       text/html; charset="utf-8"
>
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>   A parameter value that matches the token production can be
>     transmitted either as a token or within a quoted-string.  The quoted
>     and unquoted values are equivalent.  For example, the following
>     examples are all equivalent, but the first is preferred for
>     consistency:
>
>       text/html;charset=utf-8
>       text/html;charset=UTF-8
>
>
> Notes
> -----
> Section 3.1.1.2 defines charset value to be a token. I consider this to be a bad example which might cause confusion. Why should I quote the value if it is defined as token?! You make want to use some other example.
> ...

What's relevant is the ABNF for *parameter*; and that allows both token
and quoted-string. I agree that the text in 7231 is slightly confusing
(and an issue should be opened at
<https://github.com/httpwg/http-core>), but that example actually is
correct; so this erratum should be rejected.

Best regards, Julian