Re: UTF-8 and RFC 2047

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Tue Jul 09 2002 - 06:18:00 CDT


In <Pine.LNX.4.10.10207072115020.7297-100000@spock.peak.org> John Stanley <stanley@peak.org> writes:

>Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk):

>New version:
> .... All other headers defined in this standard (excluding
> variant headers, but including specifically the Message-ID-header)
> MUST be identical in both the posted and mailed versions of the
> article, except that headers rendered in UTF-8 in the posted version
> MAY be encoded according to [RFC 2047] in the emailed version.

>No. Message ID, and by extension all headers that contain msg-id content,
>MUST NOT be different. There is ONE message id for a message, not two, not
>five.

Indeed, but the Message-ID cannot contain any non-ASCII characters and,
moreover, it is not allowed to be encoded according to RFC 2047. If the
mail people are ever inclined to allow non-ASCII in the Message-ID (and if
we follow suit), then I hope they will have the good sense not to do it
until mail transports are finally 8bit clean and encodings are things of
the past. Well, I suppose pigs might fly :-( .

However, I agree that the wording in this case was a bit convoluted and
might be misinterpreted, so it now says:

   This header, if present, MUST be included in both the posted and
   emailed versions of the article. The Newsgroups-header of the posted
   article SHOULD be included in the email version as recommended in
   section 5.5. All other headers defined in this standard (excluding
   variant headers) MUST be identical in both the posted and mailed
   versions of the article, except that headers containing UTF8-xtra-
   chars in the posted version MAY be encoded according to [RFC 2047] in
   the emailed version. In particular, the Message-ID-headers MUST be
   identical. The bodies MUST be identical in both, apart from a
   possible change of Content-Transfer-Encoding.

Note that it now removes any excuse for using RFC 2047 in the case where
no UTF8-xtra-chars are present.

I have heard no other comments on those UTF-8 and RFC 2047 wordings, so
can I now presume they are acceptable? If so, I shall press ahead with the
consequentials arising from the encoding of newsgroup-names (using '%'s).

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.