Joshua Humphries

> For the related problems, I don't see any unambiguous solution there other than education/documentation. The parser could be updated to allow identifiers: ```protobuf // unambiguous, omitting the comma is...

@mkruskal-google, I don't have permission to view that doc. Maybe it's Google-internal? Can you create a copy and make it globally readable?

@mkruskal-google, I don't think this issue is resolved. We still need another step to actually change the warnings (merged in #10586) into actual errors. Can you re-open? I'll go ahead...

Is there appetite for reviewing and accepting a fix for this and for #7192, if I were to open a pull request?

@mcy, @mkruskal-google, can this be reopened since the fix was reverted in #10657?

@mkruskal-google, to make sure I understand your comment above: are you suggesting I open a new PR with this same fix, and that it simply needs to be merged more...

ping @mkruskal-google, mind taking a quick pass?

@mkruskal-google, I've filled out the proposal for a small language change: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aJeMlnK-4t6rYkuRy1fShP_13p5ghjTq4Wne-jvBXpg/edit# (You'll have to request access to comment or send me your email address so I can pro-actively give...

> I'm more worried about how we release this to OSS @mkruskal-google, FWIW, [the](https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/reference/proto2-spec#reserved) [grammars](https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/reference/proto3-spec#reserved) on the protobuf developer site already state that this must be an identifier. So I...

> what do you think about downgrading this error to a warning? @mkruskal-google, done.