Indeed we cannot make firm proposals for email, but it would be wise to
see what they are up to, and to stick our oar in if it looks like they are
proposing something unsuitable.
Of course. But you do that by joining the IDN list and participating in the
discussion there, not by holding a separate discussion elsewhere. I hope most
of the people interested in this topic have already done this; I certainly
have.
In the meantime, I can see a particular problem coming up in mailing
moderators. Agreed it will not be settled in time for the Usefor draft,
but it would be helpful to know in advance what the eventual solutions are
likely to look like.
This would be reasonable if there was consensus on the basic approach to the
problem and all that was being argued were the details. But there isn't (quite)
a consensus yet, so it is impossible to be sure what the eventual solution is
going to look like. And while I think it highly unlikely, it is possible that
the eventual solution will be done as another layer and email addresses at the
RFC2821/RFC2822 level won't change at all. There certainly is a proposal on the
table with this characteristic.
Exactly. It is nothing short of sheer lunacy to worry about the LHS
of email addresses when the rules for the RHS are still up the air.
On the contrary, if someone is inventing an encoding for use in the RHS of
an addr-spec, then life will be much easier if they arrange things so that
the same encoding can be used on the LHS. That is why we should be
watching what they are up to.
Of course. But you asked if there were "any other moves afoot" (your exact
words) to deal with the LHS problem. And I responded that it would be
ridiculous to consider such moves at this point. I stick by my assessment.
Ned