From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Tue Mar 19 2002 - 05:07:05 CST
In <3C964C0A.3B82B481@ehsco.com> "Eric A. Hall" <ehall@ehsco.com> writes:
>Charles Lindsey wrote:
>> >>Well does any Mail system actually implement RFC 2231?
>>
>> >Turnpike does.
>>
>> Fair enough. But has anyone actually seen one in the wild?
>Netscape 4.7x (and probably earlier) generates it by default so anybody
>that uses that to post generates it.
But no, your example does not use RFC 2231.
>See the MIME headers in the attached example.
>--------------2BEDE24B2543B16E2463814F
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1;
> name="=?iso-8859-1?Q?T=EBsting=20r=EBlatively?= long
> =?iso-8859-1?Q?fil=EBnames=2Etxt?="
No, that is not RFC 2231. It is RFC 2047 which is actually illegal in that
context, but which did not stop my mailreader (dtmail) from interpreting
it "correctly". Which simply reinforces my point that RFC 2231 was an
unnecessary complication.
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>Content-Disposition: inline;
> filename="=?iso-8859-1?Q?T=EBsting=20r=EBlatively?= long
> =?iso-8859-1?Q?fil=EBnames=2Etxt?="
Ditto.
So, I repeat my question. Has anyone actually seen a correct usage of RFC
2231 in the wild?
-- 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