Re: bad rfc2047 encoding

[Dave Love <d.love@dl.ac.uk>]

[Re-sent due to encoding problems :-/.]

Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:

> Bjørn Mork <bmork@dod.no> writes:

[In something that hasn't reached here...]

> Yup, I now agree parsing the header is required.  RFC 2047 is only to
> be used in some parts of the header.  I wonder if rfc822.el is up to
> this though,

I don't think it does the right job.

> I remember it didn't cope with non-ASCII properly at all.

In what way?  I went through checking for such problems long ago.  I
doubtless missed some, and maybe some have been added since, but they
should be easy to fix.  (Emacs 21 only -- I don't know how you'd do it
properly in XEmacs.)

> > In this example the quoted-string should probably be unquoted and
> > then encoded. Or would that break something?
> 
> It could perhaps encode the quotes too.

The spirit of the RFC and examples seem to suggest unquoting the
string, encoding it, and (perhaps) re-quoting encoded word sequences
on decoding.  Is the correct behaviour really not explicitly specified
somewhere?