On 23/09/2013 15:45, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 9/23/13 7:21 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
On 21/09/2013 03:34, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
To my chagrin, I just realized that this header field is in fact
registered:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/message-headers/message-headers.xhtml#prov-headers
It's been so long since I looked into this issue that I must have
forgotten.
However, I do plan to get an RFC published so that there is
stable documentation for the Jabber-ID header field.
Hi Peter, Some comments on -10:
Hi Alexey,
Hi Peter,
Thanks for the feedback. When I submitted this I-D to the ISE, I said
that you'd be a potential reviewer. It seems I was right. :-)
Your ABNF in Section 2:
Jabber-ID = SP *WSP pathxmpp *WSP CRLF
And your example in at the end of 3.2 is:
Following the rules in [RFC5122] and the Jabber-ID header field
syntax, the resulting header field might be as shown below (note
that this representation includes folding white space, which is
allowed in accordance with the ABNF):
Jabber-ID: ji%C5%99i@%C4%8Dechy.example
I think this doesn't match your ABNF I think the ABNF should be:
Jabber-ID = SP [FWS] pathxmpp [FWS] CRLF
Thanks for the correction. Do most of the header field definitions
allow folding white space?
Yes, but there are some inconsistencies in whether they are allowed at
the end of the value.
Many header fields include "[CWFS]" (folding whitespace with optional
comments) instead of "[FWS]". For simplicity of parsing I would avoid
using these, unless needed. But if you choose to use [CFWS], that would
still be fine.
I was trying to make it consistent with
general practices, but I admit that I last looked at this almost 6
years ago. I'll check some of the header fields that are registered
with IANA.
