home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!bonnie.concordia.ca!daily-planet.concordia.ca!alcor.Concordia.CA!gpkatch
- From: gpkatch@alcor.concordia.ca (Gary Katch)
- Newsgroups: comp.mail.headers
- Subject: Is this RFC822 example illegal?
- Message-ID: <4580@daily-planet.concordia.ca>
- Date: 23 Jul 92 14:25:53 GMT
- Sender: usenet@daily-planet.concordia.ca
- Reply-To: Gary Katch <gpkatch@alcor.concordia.ca>
- Organization: Concordia University
- Lines: 34
- X-Mailing-Address: Computing Services C-1012
- 1455 De Maisonneuve West
- Montreal (Quebec) H3G 1M8
- X-Phone-Numbers: voice (514) 848-7632
- fax (514) 848-7622
- Originator: gpkatch@alcor
-
- Sorry, I an reposting, last message got mangled.
-
- I was looking at the syntax of In-Reply-To and References in
- RFC822. Here are the relevant parts:
- --------
- optional-field =
- [...]
- / "In-Reply-To" ":" *(phrase / msg-id)
- / "References" ":" *(phrase / msg-id)
- [...]
- phrase = 1*word ; Sequence of words
- word = atom / quoted-string
- quoted-string = <"> *(qtext/quoted-pair) <">; Regular qtext or
- atom = 1*<any CHAR except specials, SPACE and CTLs>
- specials = "(" / ")" / "<" / ">" / "@" ; Must be in quoted-
- / "," / ";" / ":" / "\" / <"> ; string, to use
- / "." / "[" / "]" ; within a word.
-
- [Example]
- A.3.3. About as complex as you're going to get
- [...]
- In-Reply-To: <some.string@DBM.Group>, George's message
- -----------------------------------------^
-
- Given that only phrases or message-id's can appear in the
- field-body, and that phrases are made of words and words of atoms,
- and an atom cannot be a special, then the comma following
- the address in the example is illegal, right?
-
- Further, one could put neither addresses nor dates in the field-body
- unless these strings are quoted (there is "." and "@" in addresses,
- and ":" and "," in dates).
-
- -- gk
-