ietf-nntp OVER and PAT

[Charles Lindsey]

In <20001118160914.G34936 at demon.net> "Clive D.W. Feather" <clive at demon.net> writes:

>I think we should do one of two things.

>(1) PAT takes one wildmat argument, which is just like everyone else's.

>(2) PAT takes multiple wildmat arguments, just like everyone elses,
>and each one is tested separately; all must pass.

Both are incompatible with XPAT, (2) the more so (but I think you meant
"one must pass").

How many current XPATs inplement (2)? (In any case, they would be wrong in
accordance with our recently released Common Extensions RFC).

So I would prefer (1), or even XPAT if a clean way could be found.

>[In both cases we use \, to escape commas, and \u0020 or something to
>escape space.]

\u or whatever needs to match arbitrary whitespace (unless we continue
with the present OVER canonicalisation, which Andrew doesn't like) on
account of the fact that there is no other way to say "match arbitrary
whitespace here" in wildmats (they are not full REs).

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Email:     chl at clw.cs.man.ac.uk  Web:   http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Voice/Fax: +44 161 436 6131      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9     Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5