[rfc-i] ABNF (RFC2234) vs HTTP's augmented BNF syntax (RFC822 + RFC2616)

Dave Crocker dhc2 at dcrocker.net
Thu Feb 17 11:06:59 PST 2005


On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:20:35 -0500, Bruce Lilly wrote:
>  I have. Unfortunately, the tendency of some developers of
>  applications using Internet protocols is to take your "I have
>  never seen..." and assume that such things never happen. And
>  lo and behold, an interoperabilty incompatibility is born.

interoperability problems happen when folks do things differently.  one approach to dealing with this is to try to document all the different ways folks do things.

this is a losing battle, because the list constantly changes.

the alternative is to define a set of proscribed behaviors and declare the rest as being outside the specification.

there is a solid, clear history that shows interoperability being achieved more by having the core functionality reduce alternatives than by increase them. 


d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
+1.408.246.8253
dcrocker  a t ...
WE'VE MOVED to:  www.bbiw.net



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list