Re: [Ltru] Issue 63:

[Peter Constable <petercon at microsoft.com>]

I agree: we don't change references in ABNF but, rather, keep those consistent with conventions given in RFC 5234.


Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: ltru-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of John Cowan
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 8:15 AM
To: Phillips, Addison
Cc: Alexey Melnikov; LTRU Working Group
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Issue 63:

Phillips, Addison scripsit:

> I support replacing ABNF notations as documented by Martin in a previous
> email on this thread with U+ notation. However I note that the ABNF
> for record-jar in Section 3.1.1 contains references to Unicode code
> points in this production:
> 
>    CHARS      = (%x21-10FFFF)      ; Unicode code points
> 
> I want to know if we can keep this, or, failing that, what we're
> supposed to change it to. Note that I got this particular production
> from draft-iri (that would be your draft, Martin :-) ).

That's needed for our (slight abuse of) ABNF; we don't change it.  It's the stray
references to characters in text that are being proposed for change.

-- 
A poetical purist named Cowan           [that's me: cowan at ccil.org]
Once put the rest of us dowan.          [on xml-dev]
    "Your verse would be sweeter        http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
    If it only had metre
And rhymes that didn't force me to frowan."     [overpacked line!] --Michael Kay
_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru