On 5/19/25 11:55 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
On 17.05.2025 16:32, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
I've encountered this style before while doing genart reviews.
It does seem to precisely define they syntax. But it takes an order of
magnitude more text than equivalent ABNF would.
I fail to grasp any benefits that this provides. Are there any?
It makes implementing easier, in case you're willing to be *told* how to
do things.
I think it is the business of IETF to tell implementers *what* to
implement, not *how*. We should be specifying the minimum constraints
necessary to ensure interoperability. There is a place for
implementation notes - a non-normative appendix.
In my many years as an implementer, I objected to being told *how*. That
was my job, and I wanted the freedom to come up with the best approach
within prevailing constraints.
Thanks,
Paul
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
