From: Veda R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
So my problem is when i develop a parser should i assume what the
RFC says and develop the parser to support only what RFC permits or
should i stick to the ABNF.
Section 20.10 forbids the use of some constructions that the ABNF
would otherwise permit.
Beware that a "URI" parser needs to know what sort of context the URI
appeared in -- contexts like Contact headers, which allow either
name-addr or addr-spec, and to which section 20.10 applies, and
contexts like the request-URI, which only admit addr-spec and to which
section 20.10 does not apply.
2. In absoluteURI definition
ABNF :
authority:srvr/reg-name
2.1How do i distinguish whether what follows "//" is srvr or reg- name.
2.2Which should be given priority?
2.3If i choose to implement only srvr , what are the
drawbacks. In other-words how important is reg-name.
Does it matter? Isn't absoluteURI just the generic syntax of "URIs
whose scheme I do not understand", and can't it safely be modeled as a
string of characters that avoids the appropriate special characters?
Dale
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
