[feedback-report] Re: ABNF

[Paul Hoffman]

At 1:39 PM -0400 5/25/07, Yakov Shafranovich wrote:
>...... Original Message .......
>On Fri, 25 May 2007 10:28:54 -0700 Paul Hoffman
><paul.hoffman at domain-assurance.org> wrote:
>>At 11:46 PM -0400 5/24/07, Yakov Shafranovich wrote:
>>>2. ABNF grammar will be needed at some point.
>>
>>Why? Have any developers found that the current description is not
>>good enough? And, more to the point, do we think those developers
>>would be helped by ABNF?
>>
>>I'm not a developer but I know how to read MIME stuff. I had no
>>problem reading the technical part of the spec, and the examples
>>looked exactly what I thought they would based on the spec. I don't
>>think ABNF would add much, and unless we do it perfectly, will
>>introduce errors.
>>
>
>I am not a fan of ABNF unless necessary but my understanding is that the
>IETF will require ABNF for a new MIME type (at least that was my experience
>when I wrote RFC 4080).

The current plan is to submit this as an Informational RFC, which 
doesn't need (or want) the IETF approval and oversight.

Having said that, I'm interested in RFC 4180. Did you submit that to 
the IETF, or directly to the RFC Editor? And who in specific told you 
that you needed to add ABNF? That requirement isn't in RFC 4288.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Domain Assurance Council