Pete Resnick <presnick(_at_)qualcomm(_dot_)com> wrote
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:
+1
It makes reading such documents much easier. We went through all the
USEFOR drafts a long time ago to put them into that format. It takes some
effort, but IMHO it is worth it.
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 would hope not. But it sounds as if the RFC Editor is willing to play
without that.
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clerew(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave,
CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5