clarify ABNF layering

[mnot]

Pete Resnick:

Throughout the document (and the other documents in the series): I now understand that you intend a two stage parse for header fields and have that represented in the ABNF as a separate overall message syntax and a header field value syntax. That's fine, but I would ask that you make this clearer somewhere in section 3 of the p1 document. You talk about the parsing, but I think it is well worth describing that there are two levels of ABNF, and that the ABNF rule name corresponds to the header field name. It is fine to do it this way, but it's not the way that ABNF has been used in the past, so best to make it crystal clear.

Reported by julian.reschke@gmx.de, migrated from https://trac.ietf.org/trac/httpbis/ticket/540

[mnot]

julian.reschke@gmx.de changed summary from clarify ABNF levels to clarify ABNF layering

[mnot]

• julian.reschke@gmx.de changed attachment to 540.diff
• julian.reschke@gmx.de commented:

Proposed patch

[mnot]

julian.reschke@gmx.de commented:

From 2528:

clarify ABNF layering for field names (see #540)

[mnot]

• julian.reschke@gmx.de changed resolution to incorporated
• julian.reschke@gmx.de changed status from new to closed

[mnot]

fielding@gbiv.com commented:

From 2533:

rephrase 2528 to be more understandable by non-spec-authors; see #540

[mnot]

fielding@gbiv.com commented:

From 2534:

another attempt to rephrase 2528 to be more understandable by non-spec-authors; see #540

[mnot]

fielding@gbiv.com commented:

From 2535:

move that paragraph to the right section; see #540