Re: Integer ABNF in syntaxes I-D

["Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>]

At 07:16 AM 4/24/2003, Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
>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").

s/except/accept/

>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?

s/server/implementation/ and s/should/must/,  yes.

>Do the drafts allow that?

I don't recall an explicit statement to this effect in the
drafts, but I believe it is allowed by general interoperability
principles of the Internet.

Kurt