Re: [VCARDDAV] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6350 (3100)

["Javier Godoy" <[e-mail]>]

On 2012-01-30 15:41, Simon Perreault wrote:

> On 2012-01-30 13:29, RFC Errata System wrote:
>> Original Text
>> -------------
>> type-param = "TYPE=" type-value *("," type-value)
>>
>> Corrected Text
>> --------------
>> type-param =  "TYPE=" type-value *("," type-value)
>> type-param =/ "TYPE=" DQUOTE type-value *("," type-value) DQUOTE
>
> Well, all parameters can be implicitly quoted. So why restrict yourself to
> the TYPE parameter?

Because Section 5 specifies that "the property parameter can be multi-valued
in which case the property parameter value elements are separated by a COMMA"
and "property parameter value elements that contain the COLON, SEMICOLON, or
COMMA character separators MUST be specified as quoted-string text values".

As I understand Section 5, there are two value elements ("text" and "voice"),
and what must be quoted is not the property parameter *value* (as in
TYPE="text,voice"), but the property parameter value *elements* (as in
TYPE="text","voice").
.
Since TYPE is defined as "a comma-separated subset of a predefined
enumeration", not only there is no need to escape the comma, but the comma
MUST NOT be escaped since it is the list delimiter instead of a part of the
*parameter value element*.

This is similar to
 N;SORT-AS="Aboville,Marie,Christine":d'Aboville;Marie,Christine;;
instead of
 N;SORT-AS="Aboville","Marie,Christine":d'Aboville;Marie,Christine;;


> If the ABNF is to be fixed, it would need to be done implicitly for all
> parameters at once.

Most of the other parameters either must be quoted (and already allow DQUOTE
in ABNF), or are defined as a single element that cannot contain
comma/semicolon/colon (thus the implicit quote rule is harmless). Even most of
the list types are not ambiguous if the whole value is quoted, for instance
the integer-list value "+1234556790,432109876" can be understood as
"[phone]","432109876", but there are no conflicting examples or
definitions in RFC 6350.

My concern is that quoting "text,voice" does not conforms Section 5, and
should be explicitly allowed. Whether the requirement of quoting value
elements per Section 5 remains as an implicit rule or it is explicitly stated
in the ABNF, is a separate issue that I didn't intend to discuss.


Best Regards

Javier