ietf-822
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Funny disruption of subject lines

1999-03-11 18:06:14
On 3/11/99 at 4:35 PM -0800, Ned Freed wrote:

It depends on the header field. Subject lines and other free-form fields
used to only compress at wrapping points, and now don't compress at all.

When structured fields are rewritten, however, the entire field ends up
getting compressed.

This I think is reasonable. The elements in structured field each have specific semantics, so getting rid of spaces or comments between them to get at those elements is non-problematic. For things that are unstructured like Subject, losing whitespace may lose real semantics.

At 4:24 PM -0800 3/11/99, Dan Wing wrote:

On Thu, 11 Mar 1999 17:36 -0600, Pete Resnick wrote:

The rule (which is clear in the DRUMS rewrite of 822) is that you remove only the CRLF. You do not do any "space reduction".

Agreed for unfolding.

But for folding, doesn't this ABNF:

   FWS             =       ([*WSP CRLF] 1*WSP) /   ; Folding white space
                           obs-FWS

allow me to place an arbitrary number of spaces (or tabs) on the folded line?

I believe this is correct.

FWS is *not* the "folding rule". FWS is a place in a production where white space may occur that can have folding in it. The folding rule is stated in 2.2.3:

The general rule is that wherever this standard allows for folding white space (not simply WSP characters), a CRLF may be inserted before any WSP.

In this sense, the CRLF is the *only* thing that is "inserted" when you are folding, and is the only thing that is "removed" when you are unfolding.

pr
--
Pete Resnick <mailto:presnick(_at_)qualcomm(_dot_)com>
Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated
Ph: (217)337-6377 or (619)651-4478, Fax: (619)651-1102