Re: Design of metalanguages (was: Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus c


On May 17, 2007, at 9:29 AM, Tony Finch wrote:

It would help future users of ABNF if the specification did notimplicitly endorse syntax that we now know to be unwise.

+1

Especially when not germane to ABNF definitions. The constructshould stand on its own when used. Perhaps labeled asThereBeDragons. :)


-Doug




_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, (continued) Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, Tony Hansen Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, Paul Overell Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, Spencer Dawkins Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, John Leslie Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, Douglas Otis Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, John C Klensin Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, Tony Finch Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, Arnt Gulbrandsen Design of metalanguages (was: Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call), John C Klensin Re: Design of metalanguages (was: Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call), Tony Finch Re: Design of metalanguages (was: Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call), Douglas Otis <= Re: Design of metalanguages, Frank Ellermann Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, Douglas Otis Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, Douglas Otis Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, John C Klensin Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, Douglas Otis Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, Frank Ellermann Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, Ned Freed Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, John C Klensin RE: [ietf-dkim] Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, Bill.Oxley Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call, Clive D.W. Feather

Re: Design of metalanguages (was: Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call)