All of these in Doug's latest note seem like reasonable changes. Only
one thing:
The RFC2822 FWS ABNF definition carries some cruft.
obs-FWS = 1*WSP *(CRLF 1*WSP) ; obsolete RFC822 text
FWS = ([*WSP CRLF] 1*WSP) / obs-FWS
Is there a reason to permit multiple CRLFs? To obsolete support, the
definition should be removed after 5 years of being declared obsolete.
FWS should be redefined as Revised FWS such as:
R-FWS = ([*WSP CRLF] 1*WSP) ; revised
I'd rather leave the FWS definition in RFC2822, rather than putting in
our own. Is there a way to say something that means "FWS from RFC2822,
but NOT obs-FWS"?
Barry
--
Barry Leiba, Internet Messaging Technology
(leiba(_at_)watson(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com)
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/l/leiba
http://www.research.ibm.com/spam
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html