All of these in Doug's latest note seem like reasonable changes. Only one thing:

The RFC2822 FWS ABNF definition carries some cruft.

obs-FWS         =       1*WSP *(CRLF 1*WSP)    ; obsolete RFC822 text
FWS             =       ([*WSP CRLF] 1*WSP) / obs-FWS

Is there a reason to permit multiple CRLFs? To obsolete support, the definition should be removed after 5 years of being declared obsolete.

FWS should be redefined as Revised FWS such as:

R-FWS        =    ([*WSP CRLF] 1*WSP)    ; revised

I'd rather leave the FWS definition in RFC2822, rather than putting in our own. Is there a way to say something that means "FWS from RFC2822, but NOT obs-FWS"?

Barry

--
Barry Leiba, Internet Messaging Technology  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/l/leiba
http://www.research.ibm.com/spam

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

Reply via email to