[Top] [All Lists]

Re: abnf for <atext> in RFC 5321?

2011-05-11 17:12:38

I believe that there is a statement that any productions that
cannot be found are defined either in the base ABNF spec or in

SM is (as usual) correct.  Section 4.1.2 of 5321 says:

   Terminals not defined in this document, such as ALPHA, DIGIT, SP,
   CR, LF, CRLF, are as defined in the "core" syntax in Section 6 of
   RFC 5234 [7] or in the message format syntax in RFC 5322 [4].

RFC 5322 has the definition of atext, so there's no dangling
reference.  This is at most an editorial issue, where it might have
been a good idea to be more specific about what symbols are imported
from where, so those of us doing a grep for "atext" would find it.