Hi - Perhaps it would be useful to consider http://www.ietf.org/IESG/STATEMENTS/pseudo-code-in-specs.txt Randy > > From: "Peter Constable" <petercon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > To: <ietf@xxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 2:16 PM > > Subject: Re: New Last Call: 'Tags for Identifying Languages' to BCP .... > This is somewhat moot since the author has indicated the relevant > portion of the ABNF will be revised. In this case, though, the ABNF > could not be said to be in contradiction with the English prose: > anything permitted by the constraints specified in the English prose > would be recognized using the ABNF. > > It is true that there are strings that could be recognized by the ABNF > that would not be permitted by the English prose, but the revision being > made to make the ABNF production in question match what Bruce Lilley > thought it should be does not change that. The only way to write the > ABNF in a way that it permits exactly no more or no less than what is > specified by the English prose would be to have the production rule > simply enumerate a specific set of terminal strings, which does not seem > to be particularly helpful, especially when the the RFC would establish > a machine-readable registry maintained by IANA in which those very > strings are enumerated. ... _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf