[rfc-i] Section 2.48 - allowing for fragment tagging on sourcecode

Jim Schaad ietf at augustcellars.com
Tue Nov 11 11:01:37 PST 2014


> Section 2.48 - should I be able to label a code fragment as oppose to a
full item - for example a fragment of asn;1 vs the complete asn.1 module

 

[paul] The list could be doubled in length for fragments, but that seems
excessive. Do you foresee that an ASN.1 fragment would be rendered
differently than a full ASN.1 module? Of that a program looking for ASN.1 in
a published RFC will do something different with a fragment than with a full
module?

 

Ok - the problem of doubling can easily be solved by the addition of
fragment attribute.

 

I don't know that I believe that there would be a difference in how things
are displayed if you are looking at code fragments vs complete code items.  

 

I do believe that there could be some significant differences between how
programs looking at the modules will handle things.

 

In drafts - tools may check that the fragments in a file match correctly to
the same whole object that is living in an appendix.

For some types, you will expect to grab and combine fragments together and
for others you will ignore fragments and just grab complete items.  A
fragment of ASN.1 cannot be combined into a compete file, however one can
combine multiple fragments of ABNF together into a single file to produce a
complete file even if there is not one in the appendix.

 

Jim

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20141111/720033ef/attachment.html>


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list