search

httpwg / httpbis-issues

1 stars 1 forks source link

OWS vs optional #537

Closed mnot closed 3 years ago

mnot commented 10 years ago

Sean Turner:

In reference to OWS in the ABNF, isn't the correct ABNF syntax to include optional fields in [] - See s3.8 of RFC 5234? Sure the text says it's optional but aren't you mixing formal syntax and informal text. I guess this is sometimes done in ABNF for omitting fields but if you've got a mechanism to indicate a field is optional I don't understand why you're not using it.

Reported by julian.reschke@gmx.de, migrated from https://trac.ietf.org/trac/httpbis/ticket/537

mnot commented 10 years ago

julian.reschke@gmx.de changed severity from In WG Last Call to In IESG Evaluation

mnot commented 10 years ago

OWS = *( SP / HTAB )

So it can be empty anyway.