On 14-Jul-20 02:58, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> Brian,
> 
> On 7/12/20 6:40 PM, Brian Carpenter via Datatracker wrote:
> 
>> Nits:
>> -----
>>
>>>> 4.1.  MSRP URI
>> ....
>>>>      transport  /= "dc"
>>
>> I see that RFC7977 takes a slightly different approach to updating the ABNF:
>>
>>>>      transport  =  "tcp" / "ws" / 1*ALPHANUM
>>
>> The advantage of listing out
>>
>>    transport  =  "tcp" / "ws" / "dc" / 1*ALPHANUM
>>
>> would be that the reader sees the full list.
> 
> While it might be nice to see the full list, it can't be counted on to 
> remain the full list. If each update did this, then every draft that 
> updates the list should formally Update every other document that 
> updates the list.
> 
> The *point* of /= in abnf is that it decouples the particular addition 
> from all others.

Sure, I realise that. But...
 
> This sort of thing should really have an IANA registry. But often the 
> expectation is that changes aren't made often enough to justify that. 

Indeed, that occurred to me as an alternative approach but a registry
with 3 entries is a bit light (and also, readers starting at RFC4975
wouldn't know to look for the registry).

> Lacking that, IMO /= is the preferred way to go.

It was only a nit...

    Brian

> 
>       Just kibitzing,
>       Paul
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Reply via email to