Hi Italo,

> 1) Section 7.2.1 (Folding for Single Backslash Strategy) says:
> 
>   Ensure that the desired maximum line length is not less than the
>   minimum header, which is 46 characters.  If the desired maximum line
>   length is less than this minimum, exit (this text-based content
>   cannot be folded).
> 
> However, the first line defined in section 7.1.1 is a "45-character string".
> I think that the paragraph be changed as:
> 
>   Ensure that the desired maximum line length is not less than the
>   minimum header, which is 45 characters.  If the desired maximum line
>   length is less than this minimum, exit (this text-based content
>   cannot be folded).

Fixed in my local copy.


> 2) Section 8.2.1 (Folding for Double Backslash Strategy) says:
> 
> 
>   Ensure that the desired maximum line length is not less than the
>   minimum header, which is 45 characters.  If the desired maximum line
>   length is less than this minimum, exit (this text-based content
>   cannot be folded).
> 
> However, the first line defined in section 8.1.1 is a "46-character string".
> I think that the paragraph be changed as:
> 
>   Ensure that the desired maximum line length is not less than the
>   minimum header, which is 46 characters.  If the desired maximum line
>   length is less than this minimum, exit (this text-based content
>   cannot be folded).

Fixed in my local copy.


> A question for clarification. Reading the following code in Appendix A:
> 
>     if [[ $strategy -eq 2 ]]; then
>       min_supported=`expr ${#hdr_txt_2} + 8`
>     else
>       min_supported=`expr ${#hdr_txt_1} + 8`
>     fi
> 
> It seems to me that the minimum lengths applied by the code in Appendix A are 
> be 53 and 54 (instead of 45 and 46 respectively)
> 
> Is my understanding correct?

The script is not conflicting with the draft, as it does ensure that the length 
is not less than the raw header text.  Though, to your point, it adds an 
additional buffer to further ensure that the header will always have some '=' 
characters wrapping around the header, for readability, in the unlikely 
scenario that such a narrow-width is needed.   I could go either way on this, 
does anyone else have an opinion?



> Thanks, Italo

Kent // author


_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to