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

[Simon Perreault <[e-mail]>]

On 2012-02-06 13:39, Peter Sheerin wrote:
> Can you explain this a bit more?
>
> Is there a fear that doing it right will impact existing 4.0
> implementations, or is the concern something else?

The RFC contains an example with:

TYPE="foo,bar"

The intent is to have two values of the TYPE parameter: foo and bar. 
Equivalent to this:

TYPE=foo,TYPE=bar

The example is wrong. It represents a single value of the TYPE 
parameter: "foo,bar" (a single string including the comma).

What I meant by "there's no way to make it right" is this: There is no 
way we can change the ABNF so that the example becomes correct. The 
example is just wrong. We must fix it with one of these:

TYPE=foo,bar
TYPE=foo,TYPE=bar
TYPE="foo","bar"

Simon

> On 2012-02-06 05:32, Simon Perreault wrote:
>> OK, we're on the same wavelength now. I suggest modifying the errata
>> because the example is wrong. There's no way to make it right while
>> keeping an ABNF that is consistent across parameters (so that it is
>> possible to write a generic vCard parser).

-- 
DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca
NAT64/DNS64 open-source        --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server               --> http://numb.viagenie.ca