Subject: [BEEPwg] Re: BEEP header & ABNF Question

From: "Marshall T. Rose" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 13:54:23 -0800

instead of "zero or more" it could say "six or seven", i suppose.

nothing is optional, however "ANS" has one more parameter than the others.

/mtr
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: [email-masked]
  To: [email-masked] ; [email-masked]
  Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 12:18
  Subject: BEEP header & ABNF Question

  [Crossposting this to BEEP and CalSched WGs to insure proper coverage]

  In my attempt to be come more BEEP savy and dealing with the CAP issues I
was rereading the BEEP RFC and I think there is a small disjoin between the
text and the ABNF that folks should be aware of (or they can point out where
the corrective text is).  The text in Section 2.2.1.1 Frame Header says:

     The frame header consists of a three-character keyword (one of:
    "MSG", "RPY", "ERR", "ANS", or "NUL"), followed by zero or more
    parameters.  A single space character (decimal code 32, " ")
    separates each component.

  (my emphasis) but the ABNF in Section 2.2.1 Frame Syntax defines each of
the parameters as mandatory:

     data       = header payload trailer

    header     = msg / rpy / err / ans / nul

     msg        = "MSG" SP common          CR LF
    rpy        = "RPY" SP common          CR LF
    ans        = "ANS" SP common SP ansno CR LF
    err        = "ERR" SP common          CR LF
    nul        = "NUL" SP common          CR LF

     common     = channel SP msgno SP more SP seqno SP size

  So is it just poor text in Section 2.2.1.1 or is there a case where the
parameters are really optional?

  I ask because it makes the ABNF different if any parameter is truely
optional and it makes the parser need a few more checks for 'skipped'
parameters (assuming one could 'leave off', say' more as the text seemingly
implys).

  Bruce

===========================================================================
  Bruce Kahn                                INet:
[email-masked]
  Messaging & Collaboration                 Phone: 978.399.6496
  IBM Software Group                         FAX: and nothing but the FAX...
  Standard disclaimers apply, even where prohibited by law...

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 15:18:09 -0500

In my attempt to be come more BEEP savy and dealing with the CAP issues I 
was rereading the BEEP RFC and I think there is a small disjoin between 
the text and the ABNF that folks should be aware of (or they can point out 
where the corrective text is).  The text in Section 2.2.1.1 Frame Header says:

(my emphasis) but the ABNF in Section 2.2.1 Frame Syntax defines each of the parameters as mandatory:

I ask because it makes the ABNF different if any parameter is truely 
optional and it makes the parser need a few more checks for 'skipped' 
parameters (assuming one could 'leave off', say' more as the text 
seemingly implys).

Bruce