-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 25 April 2002 13:33, Charles Lindsey wrote:
<snip>
So we can expect to see headers like
To: Jürgen Schmidt <jürgen(_at_)tu-münchen(_dot_)de>
<snip>
It might be interesting to know how existing mailers handle this. Typing the
above into the TO: fields of various mailers gives:
Mozilla:
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen?= Schmidt
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=3Cj=FCrgen=40tu=2Dm=FCn?=chen.de>
Netscape 4.78:
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen?= Schmidt
=?iso-8859-1?Q?=3Cj=FCrgen=40tu=2Dm=FCnchen=2Ede=3E?=
KMail 1.4.5:
To: =?iso-8859-1?q?J=FCrgen=20Schmidt?=
<=?iso-8859-1?q?j=FCrgen=40tu-m=FCnchen=2Ede?=>
Evolution 0.13: I haven't been able to cut'n'paste an ü into the to: field
there, not even from the Gnome charmap utility...
Sylpheed:
To: Jürgen Schmidt <jürgen(_at_)tu-münchen(_dot_)de>
(note: Sylpheed seems to save stuff unencoded in the Outbox)
- From this, one might conclude that simply extending rfc2047 might be the
easiest upgrade path ;-)
I think that the local-part is the smallest of the problems. local-parts are
uninterpreted and can thus carry any encoding that would be a valid
local-part in rfc2822, e.g. rfc2047. The burden to make sense out of this is
on the receiving end: If someone allows mailboxes with non-US-ASCII
characters on her machine, then she needs to make sure that she installs
tools that can handle the new encoding. For everyone else, the local-part
just looks funny.
The main problem is therefore the domain part. I must admit that I haven't yet
read the IDN/punycode draft(s?), but what is the problem with using that for
the domain?
Marc
- --
Marc Mutz <mutz(_at_)kde(_dot_)org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE8zuMx3oWD+L2/6DgRAq6mAJ4ps+a3fQYzbC0pyaF+TkZZTGCvxACfUf4y
RCJYxNF9/UMn7Lg1mZscfXM=
=Boj3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----