[Top] [All Lists]

Re: On ABNF in 5322: Advice needed

2008-09-26 10:55:22

Hi Pete,
At 15:26 25-09-2008, Pete Resnick wrote:
5322 (nee 2822upd) is in AUTH48. During this process, the editor noted some confusion about some of the text: Sometimes when I say (e.g.) "phrase", it's not clear whether I'm referring to the ABNF terminal "phrase" or a description of it. It's somewhat easy to distinguish, for instance, "a quoted string" from "quoted-string", but other places it's trickier.

The suggestion was made (and it's been made by others) that all ABNF terminals should be surrounded with angle brackets, so it's easy to distinguish "a phrase" from "<phrase>" and "a quoted string" from "<quoted-string>". My argument against doing this has always been (1) there are very few places in the text where it is ambiguous, and none (AFAIK) where it makes a difference; and (2) going through and making the change could result in errors. (It's a lot of occurrences to go through.) Advice sought:

Choice (A): "Don't touch a damn thing, Pete! It's too much of a risk to screw things up, and we're moving to Draft Standard. And nothing is so ambiguous as to make any difference."

I read the I-D again and I don't the need for a change at this stage especially as there is the risk to screw things up. The editor has a different perspective reading the I-D and would find ambiguities we might not see. I'm for choice (A). I'll rely on your best judgement to determine what could be done in the few places where it is ambiguous.

If you choose (B), I'd also like to hear your answer to the question: Does this require cycling back through the IESG or (*gasp*) another IETF last call?

I don't think that requires cycling back to the IESG as this is a question of style. It certainly doesn't require another IETF Last Call.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>