RFC Errata


Errata Search
 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 2 records.

Status: Verified (1)

RFC 6068, "The 'mailto' URI Scheme", October 2010

Source of RFC: IETF - NON WORKING GROUP
Area Assignment: app

Errata ID: 4020
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: NARUSE, Yui
Date Reported: 2014-06-23
Verifier Name: Barry Leiba
Date Verified: 2014-07-01

Section 2. says: 

   2.  <obs-local-part> and <NO-WS-CTL> as defined in [RFC5322] MUST NOT
       be used.

It should say:

   2.  <obs-local-part> and <obs-NO-WS-CTL> as defined in [RFC5322] MUST
       NOT be used.

Notes:

NO-WS-CTL doesn't exist in RFC5322; it was changed to obs-NO-WS-CTL.

A future update to "mailto" should consider other whitespace changes as well.

Status: Reported (1)

RFC 6068, "The 'mailto' URI Scheme", October 2010

Source of RFC: IETF - NON WORKING GROUP
Area Assignment: app

Errata ID: 4706
Status: Reported
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: stream9
Date Reported: 2016-06-08

Section 2.3 says: 

3.  Whitespace and comments within <local-part> and <domain> MUST NOT
    be used.  They would not have any operational semantics.

It should say:

3.  Whitespace and comments within <local-part> and <domain> MUST NOT
    be used except quoted whitespace in <quoted-string>. 
    They would not have any operational semantics.

Notes:

<local-part> contain <quoted-string> and <quoted-string> contains <quoted-pair> according to definition in RFC 5322.

quoted-pair = ("\" (VCHAR / WSP)) / obs-qp

As definition above, <quoted-pair> contains whitespace <WSP> which according to RFC 6068, MUST NOT be used.

But example in RFC 6068 section 6.2 contain quoted whitespace. So I guess this is an exception.

Report New Errata



Advanced Search