Re: Integer ABNF in syntaxes I-D

[Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>]

Kurt D. Zeilenga writes:
>At 04:28 AM 4/24/2003, Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
>>Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:
>>> That is, -0 should be invalid.
>>
>>I don't see why.  What I'm wondering is why 003 is invalid.
>>Though I agree that either both should be valid or both invalid.
> 
> Because implementations, clients in particular, are very bad
> at parsing anything out of the ordinary.  (...)

OK.

> It is much better to have only one encoding option and promote ("be
> liberal in what you except but strict in what you generate").

With 'liberal in what you expect', do you mean a server could accept -0
and 003, but if so it should rewrite them to 0 and 3?  Do the drafts
allow that?

-- 
Hallvard