In <200204251726(_dot_)g3PHQMe09743(_at_)astro(_dot_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu>
Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:
don't worry about UTF-8 or usenet compatibility anytime soon.
it's far more important to minimize disruption in email service
than it is to use utf-8 on the wire, or to try to keep email and
usenet in sync.
Has anybody looked into the transitional issues that would arise if Email
was to be moved into allowing UTF-8 headers?
Yes. There are a number of sticking points, but on the whole it is doable.
The real question is on what scale the benefits outweigh the costs.
Or are you resigned to the fact that we shall still be encoding headers
using RFC 2047 in 40 years time even though all transports and operating
systems will be 8bit (and even bibary) clean by that time?
I'm resigned to the fact that people don't seem to understand that creating a
backwards-compatible scheme is a necessary first step. Once this is done all
sorts of cute things, including but not limited to UTF-8 message headers, are
possible. But this can only happen after the initial work is done.
Ned