Re: Status of issue #30 (Implied LWS)

Brian Smith wrote:
> Jamie Lokier wrote:
> > Mark Nottingham wrote:
> > > Yes; we looked at disallowing it, but implementations that support
> > > folding do already support whitespace-only lines. We don't want to
> > > make them non-conforming. Also, it made the ABNF really, really ugly.
> > > Really.
> > >
> > > We're considering discouraging producing all-whitespace continuation
> > > lines in prose. Thoughts?
> > 
> > All continuation lines are discouraged; maybe that could be worded a
> > little more strongly.  With the word "discouraged" :-)
> 
> Mark already said "[S]enders must not produce messages that include LWS
> folding[.]" It would be confusing to make LWS folding a MUST NOT and then
> make a special case of it "discouraged."

Ok, make sure to capitalise the MUST NOT and I'm happy :-)

-- Jamie