Re: Comma-seperated lists

Pete Resnick wrote:

 [# and LWSP] 
> What? What does one thing have to do with the other?

,,,,,   ,,,,,    ,,,,    ,,,,,
  ,     ,       ,          ,
  ,     ,,,,     ,,,       ,
  ,     ,           ,      ,
  ,     ,,,,,   ,,,,       ,   

| The full form is "<n>#<m>element " indicating at least
| <n> and at most <m> elements, each separated by one or
| more commas (",") and optional linear whitespace (LWS).
 [RFC 2068 2.1, similar in 2069, 2616, 2617, 2831]  ^^^

With optional FWS you get ASCII art.  With LWS you would
get "apparently empty lines" - causing havoc if something 
in transit manages to transform them into a "really empty
line" (indicating the end of the header, CRLF CRLF).

>> Invalid: "sp ce"@example   Valid: "sp\ ce"@example   
>> Is that as it should be ?
 
> Of course, both of those are valid in 2822.

Oops, indeed, 2822(upd) has *([FWS] qcontent), unescaped
SP matches FWS, no problem.  The 2821(bis) issue is using
<qcontent> instead of *(SP qcontent).  I fear I confused
2821 <Quoted-string> and 2822 <quoted-string> assuming
that they are "identical modulo CFWS", but that's wrong.

 Frank