> I think the problem is the example in the specification, which do not comply > to this definition. But this is already covered since year 2000 *by a errata > for RFC-2392* > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/rfc2392 > > This errata contain the correct example that comply with the text: > > > I think the definition make sense. The value behind "cid:" must be URI > encoded, since in must be a valid URI. The HTTP header Content-ID has not > limitation to be encoded. > > Do you agree with my interpretation? > If yes, than we shall create an issue on CXF side and request a rollback the > changes done with CXF-7317
I fully agree, sorry for that, I had just taken a look at the example and then merged the PR. I just reverted the changes and put a note on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-7317 and https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBWS-4064. Will merge it to 3.1.x and 3.2.x branch later today... Regards Dennis
