Context Navigation

← Previous Ticket
Next Ticket →

#276 closed editorial (incorporated)

untangle ABNFs for header fields

Reported by:	julian.reschke@…	Owned by:	julian.reschke@…
Priority:	normal	Milestone:	14
Component:	non-specific	Severity:	Active WG Document
Keywords:		Cc:

Description

Currently, we use ABNF to enumerate header fields. This doesn't reflect how parsing a message works: it generates a set of field names and values, and only after that, field values are parsed according to *that* headers specific ABNF.

Get rid of these ABNF productions, and replace them with simple Overview tables.

Change History (16)

comment:1 Changed 10 years ago by julian.reschke@…

Owner set to julian.reschke@…

comment:2 Changed 10 years ago by julian.reschke@…

From [1138]:

remove header field ABNF dependencies; replace with Overview tables (see #276)

comment:3 Changed 10 years ago by julian.reschke@…

ABNF productions removed.

We should discuss whether we also want to simplify the individual header ABNFs to just define the header field value's grammar.

comment:4 Changed 10 years ago by julian.reschke@…

From [1167]:

remove unused ABNF imports (see #276)

comment:5 Changed 10 years ago by julian.reschke@…

Resolution set to incorporated
Status changed from new to closed

comment:6 Changed 10 years ago by julian.reschke@…

We currently have:

  A   = "fieldname" ":" OWS A-v
  A-v = ...

But Part 1 says:

  header-field   = field-name ":" OWS [ field-value ] OWS

So trailing OWS is not part of the header field value.

So if we keep the A/A-v notation, don't we need to add OWS to the end?

comment:7 Changed 10 years ago by julian.reschke@…

Milestone changed from 13 to 14

Prague 2011 editors discussion: remove the "A" form; it's not really needed; drop it and only use the "A-v" form (the ABNF for the field value), and drop the "-v".