Re: encodings (was Re: Last Last Call)

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Jul 01 2002 - 06:20:40 CDT


In <8RmuRa63cDB@3247.org> list-ietf-wg-apps-usefor@faerber.muc.de (Claus Färber) writes:

>Well, it's pretty straightforward: Just use RFC-2822-compatible email
>addresses but show them differently to users. It's the same method IDNAs
>use and it does not require any software updates: They're just weired-
>looking but legal names to leagacy software.

>A spec could be written quite quickly as it could mostly be based on
>IDNA, NAMEPREP and PUNYCODE.

I don't think it is quite as quick as that. You could not use NAMEPREP for
local-parts (some other variant of STRINGPREP would be needed, at the
least). And you would need to restrict the definition of local-part so as
to leave room for some way to detect automatically which ones needed to be
decoded and which ones really were that funny string.

The the main problem is that nobody is actively trying to generate such a
spec at the moment (and it is a job for the mail people, not for us).

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.