- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 09:06:45 +0100
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 25.02.2020 07:13, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > >> On 25 Feb 2020, at 5:08 pm, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: >> >> I understand that. What trips me up is that we we have to different >> cases: one in which the shorter notation MUST be used, one in which it >> MUST NOT be used. Am I the only one who thinks that this is sub-optimal? >> >> In a perfect world, the serialization should not depend on the context >> it appears in. I understand that this is a trade-off, but it would be >> good to see more context about how we got there, and whether >> alternatives were discussed. > > If you're referring to the case of a Boolean as a Dictionary value (and it would be good if you confirmed that this is what you had in mind; if you're talking about Booleans wherever they might appear, I don't know how that would work), it was considered, but IIRC it would have required a substantially more complicated parsing algorithm, because of cases like this: Yes. > Example-Field: ;param=on-default-boolean > > Parameter values are comparatively simpler, because they can't have any further substructure. I don't quite get the example. In the spec I see: Example-DictHeader: a=?0, b, c=?1; foo=bar If this would be instead: Example-DictHeader: a=?0, b, c; foo=bar ...what would break? Best regards, Julian PS: I'm tempted to propose "!a" instead of "a=?0" :-)
Received on Tuesday, 25 February 2020 08:07:06 UTC