In <8eTB3CVZcDD(_at_)3247(_dot_)org>
list-ietf-rfc822(_at_)faerber(_dot_)muc(_dot_)de (Claus Färber) writes:
It seems you simply don't understand the concept of backwards
compatibility.
RFC 2231 uses a subset of the format of RFC 2046, which means it *is*
compatible. It does not change the format for existing parameters, it
just defines new parameters with a ``special'' format.
No, it outlaws things that were legal beforehand. For example the
x-foo'bar = baz
that I mentioned. That is a backwards incompatibility, as Ned acknowledged
in his reply, but which was a perfectly reasonable change in this case for
the reasons he gave.
--
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