[rfc-i] v3imp #8 Fragment tagging on sourcecode

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Sun Jan 25 00:57:21 PST 2015


On 2015-01-24 17:59, Sean Leonard wrote:
> On 1/24/2015 8:21 AM, Sean Leonard wrote:
>> First of all there is no such thing as "ABNF modules" yet--only ABNF
>> grammar (combined with specification text). I recognize this
>> conversation is trending to creating them.
>> Providing different definitions of the same rule in the same RFC is
>> reckless
>
> The more I thought about this, the more I would like to propose that the
> RFC itself be unit of analysis (i.e., "module").
> ...


I agree that it's good to formalize this somewhat, but I'm not convinced 
updating/extending RFC 5234 is a good idea.

For instance, in the HTTP specs we use prose rules with a well-defined 
syntax:

<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc7231.html#imported.abnf>

This might be enough for automated checkers to do the right thing.

Best regards, Julian


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list