Keith Moore wrote:
I would suggest that the encoding above is much simpler and cleaner
than a group address with multiple ACE sequences.
nope, because the ACE parses just like any other domain name.
We were talking about benefit to humans.
<PrimaryRecipient>
<DisplayName>Lõçal Admins</DisplayName>
<Mailbox>fred(_at_)lõçal</Mailbox>
<Mailbox>joe(_at_)lõçal</Mailbox>
</PrimaryRecipient>
versus
To:=?iso-8859-1?Q?L=F5=E7?=al_Admins: fred(_at_)zz-adsadfsd,
joe(_at_)zz-adsadfsd;
As postmaster for your org, which would you rather troubleshoot?
I prefer the latter by far. It is far easier to pick out the truly relevant
parts. And it being all-ASCII is a HUGE advantage, as many tools tools don't
handle non-ASCII character output or input well at all. This isn't much of a
problem when dealing with Latin-1, but it gets pretty tense when dealing
with, say, Japanese or Chinese characters.
Ned