On 27Sep2009 11:11, Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
| On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 23:39:41 +0800,
| Ed Greshko <Ed.Greshko@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
| > Too bad you continue to miss any salient point.... Forget about 2047
| > for a moment
|
| RFC 2047 explains how to use nonascii character sets in headers.
| That is the source for correct behavior.
|
| > To: "Rabbit, Duck, Stuffed" <place@xxxxxxxxxxx>
| >
| > And your mutt ended up putting it in Cc: as....
| >
| > Cc: Rabbit, Duck, Stuffed <place@xxxxxxxxxxx>
| >
| > The "Rabbit, Duck, Stuffed" needs to be treated as one item.... As I
|
| No. RFC 2047 specifically says it isn't supposed to be treated that way.
I wish I could find the original header you guys were starting with,
because mutt _is_ very RFC compliant and I have seen exactly the header
breakage we're discussing.
For clarification:
In the _absence_ of an RFC2047 encoded word, "Rabbit, Duck, Stuffed"
needs to be treated as one item. So Ed's assertion that:
To: "Rabbit, Duck, Stuffed" <place@xxxxxxxxxxx>
is a _single_ address is correct.
An RFC2047 encoded word like =?charset?enc?code...?= _is_ supposed to be
treated as one word, but _bare_ whitespace is forbidden in the =?...?=
word. The RFC quite clearly says it:
IMPORTANT: 'encoded-word's are designed to be recognized as 'atom's by
an RFC 822 parser. As a consequence, unencoded white space characters
(such as SPACE and HTAB) are FORBIDDEN within an 'encoded-word'.
For example, the character sequence
=?iso-8859-1?q?this is some text?=
would be parsed as four 'atom's, rather than as a single 'atom' (by
an RFC 822 parser) or 'encoded-word' (by a parser which understands
'encoded-words'). The correct way to encode the string "this is some
text" is to encode the SPACE characters as well, e.g.
=?iso-8859-1?q?this=20is=20some=20text?=
So it is quite important for you guys to be arguing about a specific
example of a header, because all your arguments apply in certain
circumstances.
And since I can't find the supposed header you're arguing about I'm
having trouble sorting this out.
Personally, I reply to messages using mutt's group-reply function (==
"reply to all" in other readers) and then trim the resultant to/cc
headers if appropriate. No reply-to damage required.
Cheers,
--
Cameron Simpson <cs@xxxxxxxxxx> DoD#743
http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/
Microsoft Mail: as far from RFC-822 as you can get and still pretend to care.
- Abby Franquemont-Guillory <abbyfg@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
