- From: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>
- Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 13:19:57 +0200
- To: uri@w3.org
Tim Kindberg wrote: > The logic behind the above is: > 0. Avoid obsolete local parts, and local parts involving CFWS Yes > 1. But enable as many email addresses allowed by RFC 2822 as > possible That chould be all if you really want it, but maybe draw the line at some cases of quoted-pair within quoted-string, e.g. a backslash + space pair or worse. > 2. While ensuring RFC 3896 compatibility Of course. > 3. Can't %-encode characters without ambiguity, since RFC > 2822 allows email addresses containing % HEX HEX constructs IMHO it says "encode %, encode once", so you get %25 for % no matter what came after the original %. > 4. So we have to avoid / "^" / "`" / "{" / "|" / "}" You could %-encode them. > 5. And it seems a bad idea to allow "#" / "%" / "?" You probably (?) have to encode # because you need it later in your syntax, it's clear for %, maybe unnecessary for (?). You didn't catch the quoted-string / quoted-pair stuff, e.g. "not..me"@example, for more examples see RfC 3696 chapter 3 and table 1, add the missing DQUOTEs whenever it shows a \. It's messy, you probably also have to encode DQUOTE and \. "not@me"@example => %22not%40me%22@example "oh\\no"@example => %22oh%5C%5Cno%22@example Bye, Frank
Received on Friday, 8 July 2005 11:24:39 UTC