Philip Guenther wrote:
The lack of a full list of regex specials is a bit awkward here, but I
guess I can live with it.
there is no ABNF in [REGEX] to refer to, and a full list will be prone
to inaccuracies. not that I expect any changes to the syntax allowed by
it, but ...
That would be an argument for moving :quoteregex to the regex draft.
I agree.
>I don't see any wording that limits support for :quotaregex to when the
>regex extension is also required, so even implementations that don't
>support regex will need to support :quoteregex.
Right, I don't think this should be required for a bare "variables"
implementation.
>To me, that means that this document needs to specify exactly what its
behavior is. (Yeah, you
>could make [REGEX] a normative reference, but ... ick.)
To me ":quoteregex" as written says that REGEX is a normative reference.
I want to repeat and maybe rephrase something I've said to Kjetil
off-list: I don't think the variables draft should depend on documents
that might take undetermined amount of time to complete.
Alexey
--
Alexey Melnikov
__________________________________________
Isode M-Box Message Store developer
http://www.isode.com/products/m-box.html
IETF standard related pages:
http://www.melnikov.ca/mel/devel/Links.html
Personal Home Page: http://www.melnikov.ca
__________________________________________