#201 closed editorial (fixed)
header parsing, treatment of leading and trailing OWS
Reported by: | julian.reschke@… | Owned by: | julian.reschke@… |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | normal | Milestone: | 10 |
Component: | p1-messaging | Severity: | Active WG Document |
Keywords: | Cc: |
Description
in draft 07 part 1 we used to say:
"The field value MAY be preceded by optional whitespace; a single SP is preferred. The field-value does not include any leading or trailing white space: OWS occurring before the first non-whitespace character of the field-value or after the last non-whitespace character of the field-value is ignored and MAY be removed without changing the meaning of the header field." -- <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-07.html#rfc.section.4.2.p.4>
In draft 08, the last 'MAY' became a 'SHOULD', which makes it read
"A field value MAY be preceded by optional whitespace (OWS); a single SP is preferred. The field value does not include any leading or trailing white space: OWS occurring before the first non-whitespace character of the field value or after the last non-whitespace character of the field value is ignored and SHOULD be removed without changing the meaning of the header field." (http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-08.html#rfc.section.3.2.p.4)
I think what we really should say is that they MAY be removed before passing the field-value to a specific header parser, thus definitions of headers MUST NOT make the presence of trailing/leading whitespace semantically significant.
Change History (7)
comment:1 Changed 13 years ago by julian.reschke@…
comment:2 Changed 13 years ago by julian.reschke@…
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from new to closed
Fixed in -09, pending review.
comment:3 Changed 13 years ago by julian.reschke@…
- Resolution fixed deleted
- Status changed from closed to reopened
comment:4 Changed 13 years ago by ylafon@…
- Milestone changed from 09 to 10
comment:5 Changed 13 years ago by julian.reschke@…
This was fixed in -09, the ticket should be closed.
comment:6 Changed 13 years ago by julian.reschke@…
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from reopened to closed
comment:7 Changed 11 years ago by mnot@…
- Severity changed from Candidate WG Document to Active WG Document
From [748]:
clarify the text about removal of leading/trailing OWS in header fields (see #201)