- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 01:21:37 +0000 (UTC)
On Fri, 4 Feb 2011, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > This must have been brought up before as e.g. > http://pukupi.com/post/2070/ is from June 2010, but I could not find > anything quickly. Apparently people are using IDNs and cannot get them > validated with email controls because the specification prohibits this. > We should probably change that. Either by saying it should first be > converted to Punycode and then validated, or by enhancing the pattern. > (The email RFC might still be outdated on this point, I have not > checked, but we have decided to not follow it anyway as it fails to > match email addresses people actually use.) On Fri, 4 Feb 2011, Mounir Lamouri wrote: > > As far as I understand it, the specification somewhat handles this by > telling UAs they "may" puny-encode/decode the value to show the IDN > value and still be able to validate it with the current rules [1]. Note > that there is a bug open to make this "may" a "should" or a "must" [2]. > > [1] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/states-of-the-type-attribute.html#e-mail-state > [2] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11579 The above bug has been fixed, so hopefully Anne's original report is now moot, and IDNs will no longer be a problem. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 9 May 2011 18:21:37 UTC