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

On 1/27/08 at 12:29 AM -0500, Bruce Lilly wrote:

>2822upd-04 section 3.6.8 reads in part:
>
>    field-name      =   1*ftext
>
>That specifies unlimited length, which conflicts with line length 
>limits specified in section 2.1.1.
>
>    field-name      =   1*77ftext

OK, this is amusing, and I think I'm OK with it. I do wonder whether 
the obs- syntax should retain the length limit.

>2822upd-04 section 4.5.8 reads:
>
>4.5.8.  Obsolete optional fields
>    obs-optional    =   field-name *WSP ":" unstructured CRLF
>
>[off-topic] unlike most sections, this one lacks vertical whitespace between
>section heading and text.

It's an issue with xml2rfc I'm trying to deal with. Obviously we'll 
make sure it gets cleared up before release.

>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 (and it is occasionally necessary to parse old messages).

No. 2822 starts with 822 as a base. We don't deal with many 733 constructs.

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick <http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102