[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Can we back up a bit and ask some basic questions?Analternate model
At 22:18 03/02/15 +0000, Roy Badami wrote:
I have to say that I don't believe coding efficiency is incredibly
important to e-mail, particularly coding efficiently of addresses
(except insofar as we need to allow useful IMAs within existing
protocols that contain length restrictions).
The main reason why I think this will inevitably happen in the future
(regardless of whether this forum mandates it) is that in the long
term we will move to a message body which (by default) is just a block
I think this is the direction we are moving to, but not very
quickly. Similar for the WWW, we are seeing more and more UTF-8,
but again, not extremely quickly.
with no requirements for special coding in any headers or in
Something like Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8
will be present for a VERY long time. But maybe that's
not what you mean by encoding.
Once this happens, and punycode is unnecessary within the
message, it would seem to me to make sence to eliminate it from
I think this is one way to argue, but a) I don't think there
is any plan for using ACE explicitly within the message body
(it can always be used, but it will be just a random sequence
of ASCII letters); b) The motivation for uniform encoding
is much stronger in the headers than in the body (I'm very
happy that nobody has brought up proposals yet for using
a variety of legacy encodings, with labeling, in the header);
c) If we think we have a good feel about where we are going,
then it may be a lot cheaper to try to go there faster and
on the most direct way we can find rather than waste time.