[Email-SIG] Double boundaries

[Anthony Baxter]

Barry Warsaw wrote:
> One of Anthony's torture tests includes a double boundary, e.g.
> 
> ...
> Content-type: multipart/x-foo; boundary=BBB
> 
> ...
> --BBB
> --BBB
> 
> ...
> 
> --BBB--
> 
> Now, his expected output would ignore the second of the double
> boundaries.  The current FeedParser injects basically an empty
> text/plain Message in there.
> 
> The best justification I could find for Anthony's expected output is in
> the RFC 2046 BNF (see Appendix A):

I guess, in this case, my "expected output" is derived from pragmatism
more than the RFC. I see these all too often, and it's always from
broken mailers. I see absolutely no benefit to creating an empty
text/plain in there. My driver for a lot of these tests was "what am
I seeing in the wild?" Absolute strict conformance to the MIME rfcs,
while a good thing in theory, should be secondary to producing the
correct result.

Anthony
-- 
Anthony Baxter     <anthony at interlink.com.au>
It's never too late to have a happy childhood.