#1053 USEFOR 2.1 Relationship to RFC 2822 (NEW: blanket statements vs. the law of unintended consequences, also Re: #1028 USEFOR 3.1.2 Date: Resolved, I think.

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bruce,

as I've said about your previous attempts to raise general issues (#1030, 
#1031), a statement of an issue that is so unclear that it's impossible to 
tell whether or not we agree on its meaning is not good for forward 
progress.

I'm assigning this as ticket #1053 with title "Relationship to RFC 2822", 
in the belief that the actionable part of your message is that you want it 
made clear:

> While the 2.1 text says "MAY" it doesn't specifically say that it
> overrides 2822, so it's not 100% clear.  It's unclear what the order
> of precedence is in interpreting 2822 vs. 2.1 vs. the presumably
> agreed-upon obs-phrase text, etc.

I have no idea how to turn the following into actionable text:

> So MUST means MAY except where (e.g. obs-phrase) MAY means MUST. Unless
> of course MUST means MAY again.

So I'm going to ignore it.

                   Harald