On Wed, 16 May 2007, John C Klensin wrote:
It seems to me that we have two separate issues here (I'm not
even going to go so far as "problems"):
(1) Some documents have used the term LWSP in a way that is not
strictly conformant with the definition in the ABNF document.
(2) From that point of view, it is easy to argue that ABNF has just
gotten too complex, both as the result of trying to formalize some
characteristics of 822 while maintaining a single-pass syntax evaluator
and possibly as a second-system effect.
I thought the problem is that protocols that have used LWSP correctly have
had too many interop problems, so they have replaced it with a simpler
rule such as FWS.
I'm surprised you say ABNF has become too complex. It's hardly changed
apart from removal of the # rule, and if you took anything else out it
would lead to rather less readable grammars.
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at> http://dotat.at/
NORTH FITZROY SOLE LUNDY FASTNET: WEST OR NORTHWEST 4 OR 5, OCCASIONALLY 6 OR
7. MODERATE, OCCASIONALLY ROUGH. OCCASIONAL RAIN OR DRIZZLE. GOOD BECOMING
MODERATE OR POOR.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf