Re: [Ltru] Re: [EAI] New draft for allowing UTF-8 in SMTP responses

[Ned Freed <ned.freed at mrochek.com>]

> This explanation might be slightly different from Addison's.

> John C Klensin <klensin at jck dot com> wrote:

> > Another issue you didn't mention is that, in an environment in which
> > the language negotiated runs right to left, it not clear where all the
> > pieces go.   Presumably, if this specification doesn't change the
> > syntax specified in 2821 (the examples in this document imply that,
> > but don't state it), we have
> >
> >        Reply-line = Reply-code [ SP text ] CRLF
> >
> > But, if "text" can run right to left, do extended reply codes go at
> > the beginning of the string (i.e., to the right) or do they imply a
> > separate subfield... noting that either raises all of the BIDI issues
> > simply because the Reply-code and SP are required to be expressed in
> > Western digits and ASCII characters.

> Right-to-left is a display concept only.  All components appear in the
> order specified: first a required Reply-code, then (optionally) a space
> followed by text, then a required CRLF.  How this is displayed or
> printed depends on the directionality of the characters in 'text', but
> the order of the items is always the same.

And RFC 2034 requires that the enhanced status code appear at the beginning of
the text part of the response. There's no wiggle room here IMO.

				Ned

P.S. Now that NOTARY is at draft, it's probably time to drag RFC 2034 forward
as well. Any objections?

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru