In <432743812(_dot_)1041338048(_at_)majormajor(_dot_)rem(_dot_)cmu(_dot_)edu>
Lawrence Greenfield <leg+(_at_)andrew(_dot_)cmu(_dot_)edu> writes:
--On Tuesday, December 31, 2002 4:44 PM +0000 Charles Lindsey
<chl(_at_)clw(_dot_)cs(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk> wrote:
No, the Usefor text is not recommending violating anything. The text I
posted here is entirely consistent the RFC 2047/2231 as regards all cases
that those RFCs appear to cover (and if it is not, then please tell me -
that is why it was posted here).
The draft proposes identifying MIME parts with message/rfc822 that do not
conform to RFC [2]822.
So? There is no requirement for message/rfc822 to conform to RFC [2]822,
as I showed. So please explain your problem more clearly.
--
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