[Top] [All Lists]

Re: A question/comment on the envelope test regarding envelope parts

2008-07-30 01:20:19

Ned Freed wrote:
AFAIK such normalization isn't called for anywhere in RFC 5228. Indeed, the RFC goes out of its way to allow :all to be used to perform tests on syntactically invalid envelope field values. So if your implementation attempts some sort of
normalization, fails, and ends up with something other than the original
string, I'd have to call that broken.
Agreed, I see that now, thanks.

Btw, I was also referring to the wrong RFC regarding the addresses :)

The new notary draft does not mention the interaction with address parts
either. In my opinion it would be best to prohibit the use of an
ADDRESS-PART parameter for an envelope test that involves envelope parts
that represent no addresses and let the matching act on unprocessed
string values.

Since :localpart or :domain make no sense on anything other than an address
field, this seems like a reasonable restriction to me.
Ok, I am glad that you agree.



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>