In <200204251340(_dot_)g3PDede11860(_at_)astro(_dot_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu>
Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:
However, I would like to know why 2047 is thought to be a "poor mechanism"
for this purpose (i.e. why was it not standardized that way - it seems to
work in a wide variety of situations).
partially because 2047 imposes strict limitations on the lengths of
encoded-words, doesn't allow them to appear in quoted strings, and
contains characters which aren't legal in MIME parameters.
But WHY doesn't it allow them to appear in quoted strings? What harm
ensures?
I just tried a test message to
To: "Jürgen D. Schmidt" <...>
and my mailer (dtmail) sent it as
To: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen_D._Schmidt?=" <...>
which is, of course, wrong even though most mailers would have done the
same. The "correct" way to do it is, apparently
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen?= "D. Schmidt" <...>
And the limitation on length doesn't really matter because there is
provision for sticking split pieces together again.
partially because there are a few things out there that unilaterally
translate all 2047 encodings in a message from one charset to another,
or that decode all 2047 encodings - and 2047 was explicitly designed to
permit the former.
And you are saying that RFC2231 does not allow that, and that was a good
enough reason why RFC2231 encoded differently than RFC2047? Remember that
the case we are looking as is where a name parameter in a Content-Type (or
more properly a Content-Distribution) was written as
name "=?koi8-r?B?Q8/XxdQuZG9j?="
--
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_)clw(_dot_)cs(_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