Re: 2822upd-04 field-name vs. line length and obs-optional

Bruce Lilly wrote:
 
>    field-name      =   1*77ftext
 
> would conform to the lower recommended limit. [for reference, the
> longest field name that I know of defined in a published RFC is
> Delivery-Report-Content-Reported-Recipient-Info (47 characters)
> defined in RFC 987.]

LOL, yes, 1*77ftext could define an upper bound.

>    obs-optional    =   field-name *WSP ":" unstructured CRLF
[...]
> This one probably needs an obs-field-name as RFC 733 permitted
> space/tab within (but not at the start of, for obvious reasons)
> a field-name

No, for the same reasons why there's no  obs-at = *WSP "at" *WSP

> it is occasionally necessary to parse old messages

If you occasionally parse RFC 733 messages you will manage that
without syntax in 2822upd.

 Fran