[Ltru] singleton DIGIT (was: W3C tag policy disclaimers and IETF RFCs)

[Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de>]

Doug Ewell wrote:

>> Fair enough, 3066bis doesn't allow a digit as singleton
> Yes it does:
> singleton     = %x41-57 / %x59-5A / %x61-77 / %x79-7A / DIGIT

Sigh, and I thought that I know the ABNF by heart.  So far for
that idea.  Jefsey has to pick another "escape" character for
his "not-3066bis-scheme".  Maybe "!" or "$".

> left over from the days before the ABNF was expanded to allow
> digits (I forget when this was).

Added in -01, in -00 it was still without DIGIT.  No idea what
the old pre-LTRU drafts did, I don't find them anymore on
Addison's pages.

> Judging from all the attention this ABNF has gotten, I'd say
> the correct move is to trust the ABNF over the prose.

Yes, although I must admit that I don't recall _why_ DIGIT was
added.  John proposed to sort extensions alphabetically, and
IIRC we discussed to exclude "y" and "z" - both ideas were
rejected.  I wanted "x" instead of "x" / "X" because in ABNF
"x" is already case insensitive, also rejected, and that's all
I can say without digging through the archive.

                          Bye, Frank



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