[Top] [All Lists]

Re: abnf for <atext> in RFC 5321?

2011-05-11 16:53:36

On 5/11/2011 2:23 PM, Ned Freed wrote:
Yep. The only thing that's unusual here is that these sorts of linkages are
usually declared in the conventions section of the document rather than waiting
until the "collected ABNF" section to say it.

You mean, if only there were something like a Document Conventions section, early in the document, for containing meta-specification information like this?

Alas, the section you /are/ referring to is rather more narrowly is 4.2.1, with a title Command Argument Syntax. That's a bit obscure for finding an import of default definition-by-reference of ABNF rules.

I did not read the
whole of RFC 5222 recently, but a simple search found this definition
quickly and it seems pretty well-defined. Copying it over to RFC 5321
might be more convenient though.

Maybe, but these sorts of changes may not interact well with the ongoing EAI
work. I'm therefore opposed to making this change - if a change needs to be
made it would be to make the document linkage more prominent.


5322 and 5321 already suffer from having parallel definitions; we should seek fewer of these, not more.


  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking