[mail-vet-discuss] current syntax

[Michael Thomas]

Tony Hansen wrote:
> Michael Thomas wrote:
>   
>> Juan Altmayer Pizzorno wrote:
>>     
>>> On Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 12:06:39PM -0700, Michael Thomas wrote:
>>>  
>>>       
>>>> i haven't looked the abnf, but i'm guessing that order matters? it looks
>>>> a little odd to my aesthetics to be using white space as the delimiter.
>>>> maybe it would be better to not define an explicit order, but and
>>>> delimit the tag values by, oh say, comma?
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> In other words,
>>>
>>>     dkim=pass (comment), header.i=xyz.com;
>>>
>>> ?
>>>   
>>>       
>> yeah, that's what i was after. or maybe just more generally,
>>
>> tag=value comment* [, tag=value comment*] ;
>>
>> and not even enforce positionality of whether dkim=pass comes
>> first or whatever. that would allow us to add other things in the
>> future as well. makes the parser simpler as well.
>>     
>
> -1
>
> The comment is already explicitly there as part of CFWS (the "C" stands
> for comment, after all).
>   

What's the big deal about having cfws after every tag/value? That makes
each element completely symmetric and thus easier to parse.
> And I think having dkim=pass (or whatever=pass/fail/etc.) is the most
> important part of the semantics of each methodspec section and needs to
> be first.
>   

Why? It used to be last. I never lost sleep over it one way or the
other. Making the order irrelevant definitely makes the parsing
easier though.
> I don't care if there's a comma there or not; I don't think the parsing
> is easier or harder with or without it.
>
>   
except for fws.


       Mike