Resolve inconsistencies in IANA section; add full syntax (e.g. EBNF)

[lanthaler]

IANA Considerations (and possibly elsewhere), "form" and "format" are used inconsistently and somewhat interchangeably. I think this needs careful cleanup. Related to this -- I think there should be full syntax (possibly EBNF, possibly Unix "commandline usage"-style) and sample string(s) shown here, including the (all?) optional parameter(s),

Differences between "form" and "format" are inconsistent because we haven't decided exactly what they're going to be yet (still editing that section)... but it'll probably be "form" ... with values being "compacted", "expanded", "framed", "normalized"
[Ted Thibodeau Jr.]

As far as fully syntax - we could do EBNF/etc. Standard practice in IETF is to just list the parameters and possible parameter values.
[Manu Sporny]

[msporny]

Upon writing the EBNF text, it seems like overkill. We're just talking about a single parameter 'form', which can have one of four values. It hardly seems as if we need an EBNF syntax to describe what is already standard practice in HTTP Accept and Content-Type headers.