[Resending with my actual subscribed address so that this gets through in
a timely fashion. My apologies to all. And yes, I've re-added the pine
rule to do this automatically that I lost when my laptop died...]
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007, Paul Overell wrote:
In message <20070730073355(_dot_)GL2903(_at_)apb-laptoy(_dot_)apb(_dot_)alt(_dot_)za>, Alan Barrett
<apb(_at_)cequrux(_dot_)com> writes
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007, Alan Barrett wrote:
> It sure was. Comments and folding white space were allowed between
> any two tokens in RFC 822. And since the syntax for zone was:
>
> ("+" / "-") 4DIGIT
>
> a comment was allowed between those two. I don't know how to read
> 3.1.4 and 3.4.3 in RFC 822 and not come up with that interpretation.
Yes, you are correct.
Hang on... "+" and "-" are not in the list of special characters that
RFC822 section 3.1.4 says are used to delimit tokens.
No, but quote marks are in the list of specials, "+" and "-" are
quoted-strings.
The quote marks around the plus and minus signs are part of the 822-BNF syntax
and do not make those the quoted-strings referred to by RFC 822 section 3.1.4.
(If that isn't true, then someone needs to explain domain-literal, as its
definition starts with "[", but it's described in section 3.1.4 as a lexical
symbol distinct from quoted-string.)
So I would say
that, given input like "+0000", the sign and the digits together make
up an "atom" per the description in section 3.1.4 and the grammar in
section 3.3. The ( ("+" / "-") 4DIGIT ) production in the grammar in
section 5.1 is looking inside a single token, not looking at two tokens.
I agree.
Disagree, a quoted-string is a token
Please identify the quoted-strings in this example Date header field from the
RFC:
Date: 26 Aug 76 1430 EDT
So, I disagree with Pete and Paul and instead agree with Alan that RFC 822 did
not permit comments or folding whitespace between the sign and the number of a
numeric zone.
Philip Guenther