W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > October 2005

Re: Mailto & ima (was RFC 2822 email addresses in tag URIs)

From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 18:21:12 +0900
Message-Id: <6.0.0.20.2.20051024181346.06f00090@localhost>
To: uri@w3.org, uri@w3.org
Cc: ima@ietf.org

At 18:37 05/10/13, Charles Lindsey wrote:
 >
 >On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 00:12:35 +0100, Frank Ellermann
 ><nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> wrote:
 >
 >
 >> It's at a very early stage, and I won't bet that it flies in
 >> the next years, but OTOH it would be a bad plan if you limit
 >> tag URLs _unnecessarily_ in a way that cannot work with future
 >> I18N Mail Addresses (= IMA).
 >
 >Yes. One of the ideas floated is that a person might have two email
 >addresses - one in his native language and one in strict ASCII, and the
 >mail delivery mechanism would deliver to the first if it knew how, but
 >drop down to the second if it was forced to use existing SMTP
 >implementations. But it should deliver to one or the other, but not both.
 >
 >So how does the guy publish his email address on his web page - or how
 >might one extend the mailto URI to provide that capability? I don't think
 >this is the time to look into that seriously, but if anyone has any bright
 >ideas as to how it might look, then it would be interesting to hear them.

Hello Charles,

The current (to be resubmitted in a couple hours)
draft-duerst-mailto-bis-01 already forsees that the left hand
side of a mail address may be internationalized in the future.
What we currently say is that this is reserved for future use,
but will be encoded in UTF-8 in the mailto URI for compatibility
with IRIs.

This means that if you have a mailer that has the downgrading
features discribed above, it should work. (Of course, these
downgrading features don't exist yet.)

If you are looking for an URI scheme that says "mail to a@b.c,
but if you can't do that, mail to d@e.f", then such an extension
could be built into the mailto URI scheme, but then again,
such an extension would be similarly valuable for other schemes.
So why no propose a new scheme, maybe let's call it the or:
scheme, which takes two (sufficiently escaped, with 'sufficiently'
still to be worked out) URIs, and tries the first URI first, and
if it doesn't succeed, tries the other URI. Could be pretty
handy in some cases, even with (or particularly with) mixed schemes.

So I don't see any need to change draft-duerst-mailto-bis-01.
But please tell me if you disagree.

Regards,     Martin. 
Received on Monday, 24 October 2005 10:43:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:09 UTC