[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Ltru] [psg.com #997[ simplify ABNF by merging field and record-jar definitions



Hi -

> From: "Addison Phillips" <addison.phillips at quest.com>
> To: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de>; <ltru at ietf.org>
> Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 9:53 AM
> Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: Open points before -02
...
> > > 3 - improve registry ABNF, simplify the corresponding chapter
> >
> > That was rejected, Addison wants to document the record-jar
> > format, not its registry incarnation.  That's backwards from
> > my POV, mail (2822) and news (1036) use prose for the simple
> > general format, and syntax for the header field details, but
> > there's no rule to do it this way also in 3066bis.
>
> I suggested that an independent RFC be written to document record-jar for future generations, actually.
>
> In this case, I don't see the benefit of another ultra-complicated ABNF:
> I don't think it will save very much text, if any, and it is hard to read.
> Clarity is served by the current text/ABNF, I think.
...

I've recorded this as issue [psg.com #997], and, based on this
thread, given it a status of "rejected".

Randy, ltru co-chair




_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru




Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.