Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Range header field ABNF #196

Closed
reschke opened this issue Feb 1, 2019 · 3 comments
Closed

Range header field ABNF #196

reschke opened this issue Feb 1, 2019 · 3 comments
Assignees
@royfielding
Labels
erratum semantics

Comments

@reschke
Copy link
Contributor

reschke commented Feb 1, 2019 •
edited

The Range header field ABNF:

  Range = byte-ranges-specifier / other-ranges-specifier
  other-ranges-specifier = other-range-unit "=" other-range-set
  other-range-set = 1*VCHAR

This is another misguided attempt to restrict syntax using ABNF in presence of extension points.

For instance,

bytes=abc

matches other-ranges-specifier.

The proper fix for this is to rewrite the ABNF so it's properly layered - a generic one, plus an overlay for the only range unit we define.
@reschke
Copy link
Contributor Author

reschke commented Feb 1, 2019

This is https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5620

@royfielding royfielding mentioned this issue Mar 27, 2019
Closed
@royfielding royfielding self-assigned this Mar 31, 2019
@royfielding
Copy link
Member

I am very far down the rabbit hole on this one.

royfielding added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 4, 2019
@royfielding
Refactor the range specifier grammar to simplify and reduce distincti…
dc3ca20 
…on with range unit extensions. Related to #11, #196, #210, #212
@royfielding royfielding mentioned this issue Apr 4, 2019
Merged
@royfielding
Copy link
Member

Fixed by 7594239

reschke added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 6, 2019
@reschke
change log order for #196
98e58bb
reschke added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 9, 2019
@reschke
Mention errata id for #196, regen errata status page accordingly
7fdcdb2
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@royfielding royfielding

Labels
erratum semantics
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@reschke @royfielding