In <415CB890(_dot_)4060907(_at_)erols(_dot_)com> Bruce Lilly
<blilly(_at_)erols(_dot_)com> writes:
Charles Lindsey wrote:
In <4159F346(_dot_)9030204(_at_)erols(_dot_)com> Bruce Lilly
<blilly(_at_)erols(_dot_)com> writes:
Try RFCs 1958 and 2277, paying attention to the difference between
protocol elements and text.
Yes, using "LIST" a keyword in group syntax is not the most perfect
solution, but then we are not living in a perfect world.
[...]
I don't think we are in a position seriously to consider new syntax for
To:, Cc: and Reply-To.
Then why have you proposed such a change -- that's exactly what changing
non-protocol text to "a keyword" would do?
No, what I have proposed still falls withint the existing syntax of
<address>. Granted it is not the prettiest of solutions, it is still
better tnat no solution at all. You have a better one?
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clerew(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave,
CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5