However, like so many ideas, the real question is whether the community
requires it, thereby justifying the effort to invent the solution and
rev the specification.
You have missed the point(s):
1. As written, parsing ABNF requires arbitrarily-large lookahead
2. Because of the ambiguity, a parser which appears to be parsing ABNF
(as that is specified) may in fact be parsing a different grammar (one
without that ambiguity), and would not be suitable as a fully-conforming
implementation for the purpose of advancement of the specification to
Draft status.
Well, yes, those sound pretty serious. So serious, that I'm sure there is a
strong community desire to have changes made.
Unfortunately, I have not noticed community support for your assessment. So
the rest of the community does not share your views.
d/
---
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
+1.408.246.8253
dcrocker a t ...
WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net