Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1998 15:52:27 -0800 (PST)
From: Chris Newman <Chris(_dot_)Newman(_at_)innosoft(_dot_)com>
4. Question: Should i;ascii-casemap be the default?
I'm not sure. How does this interact with the local-part being
case-sensitive and the domain-part being case-insensitive? Could it lead
to confusion?
Hm. Perhaps we should just canonicalize all domain names to
(lower/upper)case for compares, then provide primitives (i.e., not
"header") for looking at to/from/cc like IMAP does for looking at parsed
address headers. (That's simpler than anything else I can think of.)
Then we can make casemap the default.
Making i;ascii the default is more or less a lose for similar arguments,
so I'd rather not do that.
7. Request: Implementations are required to decode header charsets.
I could live with this. A lighter-weight alternative would be:
Implementations are required to (a) treat all non-ASCII characters in a
script as a syntax error or (b) decode MIME header encoding. That's the
"you don't have to do it, but if you do it, do it right" approach.
10. Bug: Header name compares are always case-insensitive.
Why is that a bug? Header names are US-ASCII case insensitive in RFC 822.
Er, that's not necessarily what the draft says, but it should be. I
don't think it's clear int he draft.
--
Tim Showalter <tjs+(_at_)andrew(_dot_)cmu(_dot_)edu>