On 11/04/2016 03:54 PM, Michael Kay wrote:
[...]
> The spec is full of stuff like this:
>
> Note: Some legacy implementations used the simple form where the
> addr-spec appears without the angle brackets, but included the name
> of the recipient in parentheses as a comment following the addr-spec.
> Since the meaning of the information in a comment is unspecified,
> implementations SHOULD use the full name-addr form of the mailbox,
> instead of the legacy form, to specify the display name associated
> with a mailbox. Also, because some legacy implementations interpret
> the comment, comments generally SHOULD NOT be used in address fields
> to avoid confusing such implementations.
That's a model of clarity compared with what vendors did when they
*implemented* it in clients :-)
///Peter
