Closed stain closed 6 years ago
I'd recommend against this change, as I don't see what requiring the additional LF accomplishes. The risk is that it reduces interoperability by making it easier to create invalid bags.
It is not to specify an extra newline - but that there is a newline at the last line. (that is the last character of a file is CR or LF). Or to say it differently - the last line is not special, its newline is not removed.
OK, I agree on the interoperability challenge as it is not important if it is missing. But it would be good if producers are consistent.
Currently the spec is written so that the trailing line-feed is implied, (except for that ABNF for bagit.txt), as it says all tag files are line-oriented and terminated (not separated) with linefeeds.
So perhaps just "it is RECOMMENDED that the last line in a tag file also ends with CR/LF/CRLF" ? Then it is more clearly about producing than parsing.
@justinlittman thoughts on the new phrasing?
@stain Once the conflicts are resolved I will merge this. Thanks
OK with new wording.
fixed merge conflict and merged manually
.. as pointed out in the ABNF patch, even the second line in
bagit.txt
must end with linefeed.