Re: empty quoted strings and other oddities

"Gary Feldman" <gaf@ziplink.net> Fri, 04 October 2002 11:51 UTC

Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) id g94BpYL01716 for ietf-822-bks; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 04:51:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay-2.ziplink.net (relay-2.ziplink.net [206.15.168.82]) by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g94BpXv01712 for <ietf-822@imc.org>; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 04:51:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alice (206-15-129-178.dialup.ziplink.net [206.15.129.178]) by relay-2.ziplink.net (8.11.6+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id g94BpTp00227 for <ietf-822@imc.org>; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 07:51:30 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <000f01c26b9c$c6b954a0$b2810fce@alice>
From: "Gary Feldman" <gaf@ziplink.net>
To: <ietf-822@imc.org>
References: <200210011513.g91FDk027592@astro.cs.utk.edu> <002001c26a0f$f05437a0$b7880fce@alice> <20021002163610.C1650@melkebalanse.gulbrandsen.priv.no> <3D9CCC8B.4010904@alex.blilly.com> <p0510031db9c2ed7c528f@[130.237.161.114]>
Subject: Re: empty quoted strings and other oddities
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 07:54:17 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Sender: owner-ietf-822@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-822/mail-archive/>
List-ID: <ietf-822.imc.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-822-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>

>From: "Jacob Palme" <jpalme@dsv.su.se>
>Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 3:08 AM

> I have a long time complained that IETF standards did not
> tell implementors how to practically implement this golden
> rule. What is the difference between the conservative
> standards interpretation (what you should send) and the
> liberal standards interpretation (what you should accept).

I don't understand the question.  Computer science students have
long been taught that they must reasonably handle invalid input, at
the same time that they document precisely what the input must be.
How is this different from web servers still accepting http 1.0 or
C compilers still accepting K&R C?

Gary