Re: When to publish -12 - ABNF

[email protected] wrote:

>
> > Not all of CAP is in ABNF. Read the text and you will find out when it
> > is used.
> > If you have ABNF proposals - please post them, if not it looks to me as
> > if CAP
> > explains when they can be used.
>
> For the base RFCs we had:
>
>    The memo also includes a formal grammar for the content type based on
>   the Internet ABNF defined in [RFC 2234]. This ABNF is required for
>   the implementation of parsers and to serve as the definitive
>   reference when ambiguities or questions arise in interpreting the
>   descriptive prose definition of the memo.
>
> but we dont seem to have anything like this in CAP. 

No one believes that there is nothing like ABNF in CAP.

>  Why is that?  What good is provding ABNF that is not accurate?? 

It it accurate. If you want 100% of CAP to be in ABNF -  propose the ABNF
to the list. Just like the query reply, some things just do not make 
good ABNF.

> Im not going to waste my time giving you new ABNF if you'll just 
> ignore it.  If I thought it would be useful I would do it but I wont 
> waste my time otherwise.

Yea right. So, I am supposed to do 100% of this work with NO proposals 
at all.
No, I would get hate mail if I were to do all of that with no proposal 
at all
and then put it into CAP at this point. No proposal submitted means I am not
going to add it to CAP without a proposal and then only if the chairs 
call consensus on
that proposal.

The only changes going into CAP are typos, clarifications, fixing text 
or ABNF
that has issues unless the chairs call consensus for a proposal to be 
incorporated
into CAP.

-- 

 Doug Royer                     |   http://INET-Consulting.com 
 -------------------------------|-----------------------------
 [email protected]                 | Office: (208)612-INET
 http://Royer.com/People/Doug   |    Fax: (866)594-8574
                                |   Cell: (208)520-4044

                We Do Standards - You Need Standards