Pete Resnick wrote:
[# and LWSP]
What? What does one thing have to do with the other?
,,,,, ,,,,, ,,,, ,,,,,
, , , ,
, ,,,, ,,, ,
, , , ,
, ,,,,, ,,,, ,
| The full form is "<n>#<m>element " indicating at least
| <n> and at most <m> elements, each separated by one or
| more commas (",") and optional linear whitespace (LWS).
[RFC 2068 2.1, similar in 2069, 2616, 2617, 2831] ^^^
With optional FWS you get ASCII art. With LWS you would
get "apparently empty lines" - causing havoc if something
in transit manages to transform them into a "really empty
line" (indicating the end of the header, CRLF CRLF).
Invalid: "sp ce"@example Valid: "sp\ ce"@example
Is that as it should be ?
Of course, both of those are valid in 2822.
Oops, indeed, 2822(upd) has *([FWS] qcontent), unescaped
SP matches FWS, no problem. The 2821(bis) issue is using
<qcontent> instead of *(SP qcontent). I fear I confused
2821 <Quoted-string> and 2822 <quoted-string> assuming
that they are "identical modulo CFWS", but that's wrong.
Frank