I'm not sure whether this should be considered a documentation error or an actual bug, but according to the procmailrc(5) manpage: These regular expressions are *completely* compatible to the normal egrep(1) extended regular expressions. Yet, I could not get named character classes like [[:digit:]] to match instead of [0-9], while egrep(1) handles them just fine. (I wouldn't have been so surprised, were it not for the emphasis in the manpage statement. <g>)
This is indeed one of those places where the manual is not accurate enough, and in fact, I believe this issue has been reported before. As the program is not very likely to change at this point, I will try to fix the manpage to be closer to reality. Thanks for the report.