#541 closed editorial (incorporated)
use of "word" ABNF production
Reported by: | julian.reschke@… | Owned by: | |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | normal | Milestone: | 26 |
Component: | non-specific | Severity: | In IESG Evaluation |
Keywords: | Cc: |
Description
We should be more consistent in using "word" (= token / quoted-string).
Either remove it, or use it always.
Change History (6)
comment:1 Changed 8 years ago by fielding@…
comment:2 Changed 8 years ago by fielding@…
- Resolution set to incorporated
- Status changed from new to closed
comment:3 Changed 8 years ago by julian.reschke@…
comment:4 Changed 8 years ago by julian.reschke@…
comment:5 Changed 8 years ago by fielding@…
I don't understand why special was restored in [2520]. I know why it was in the spec originally, but it no longer serves that purpose. It isn't used as such in the spec, isn't used in practice (parsers), and isn't useful by external specs.
If the only reason is to explain the set to folks who don't read ABNF, then we should do that using a better comment (or better prose). For example,
tchar = "!" / "#" / "$" / "%" / "&" / "'" / "*" / "+" / "-" / "." / "^" / "_" / "`" / "|" / "~" / DIGIT / ALPHA ; ; VCHAR, excluding "(),/:;<=>?@[\]{}"
comment:6 Changed 8 years ago by julian.reschke@…
The main reason I restored it is that we had zero discussion before you removed it, and we are past IESG evaluation.
I believe it is useful to have it in the ABNF for clarity; but moving it into a comment works for me as well.
From [2519]:
(editorial) Remove unnecessary or duplicate ABNF that can be replaced with core rules: word, specials, attribute, value, and quoted-cpair; addresses #541