[UA-discuss] Regarding "RTL"

Tue Feb 24 22:51:47 UTC 2015

>
> 1) Where are e-mail solution providers gathering to discuss this?   Does a
> forum already exist?  if not, should the UASG create one?
>

I think the appropriate forum for this would be m3aawg
<https://www.maawg.org/>, although I'm unsure of whether it's actually been
raised there yet.

> 2) Brent:  How has Gmail approached this?  Ignored the dots in the
> username side of the address?

Gmail uses banner notifications to warn users when there's something
problematic about a message, e.g., a suspicious From header. See the first
expandable section of this
<https://support.google.com/mail/answer/1366858?hl=en> article for more
info.

Gmail ignores dots in the usernames of gmail.com addresses, which is doable
because Gmail controls the gmail.com namespace. So hello.world at gmail.com
goes to the same user as helloworld at gmail.com. We can't, however, do that
for other domains. For example, helloworld at outlook.com and
hello.world at outlook.com are different users.

> So, consumer mail clients are prepared with the LTR rule: that on the left
> side from "@" sign is name, and on the right side is domain name.
> But, they don't check this rule.
> I presume that in the RTL world, consumer mail clients do the same - with
> RTL rule.

I think the circumstances are different in the RTL world. Fully
right-to-left email addresses (with a RTL local-part) are pretty rare, so
while there may be precedent, I don't think the behavior is well-defined.

Brent London
brentlondon at google.com
+1 650-214-5206

On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:16 AM, Dusan Stojicevic <dusan at dukes.in.rs>
wrote:

>  Dear all,
>
> We have RTL problem in LTR world already. Try this.
> F.E. / I will use ASCII just to make a point>
> com.gmail at stojicevic.dusan
> I send one email to this mail address and it gone "as usual".
> After a minute, I've got a massage in attach.
>
> So, consumer mail clients are prepared with the LTR rule: that on the left
> side from "@" sign is name, and on the right side is domain name.
> But, they don't check this rule.
> I presume that in the RTL world, consumer mail clients do the same - with
> RTL rule.
> The real question is - should mail clients check this?
>
> Regards,
> Dušan
>
>
> On 24.2.2015 2:17, Mark Svancarek wrote:
>
>  I’ve seen some discussion activity at w3.org (as recently as last
> December https://www.w3.org/International/wiki/EAI_Address_Issues ) but
> it doesn’t seem actionable.  I think we’ll need to use this group to get
> all similar issues clarified and make them usable by developers.
>
>
>
> *From:* ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org
> <ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Don Hollander
> *Sent:* Monday, February 23, 2015 4:46 PM
> *To:* Brent London
> *Cc:* ua-discuss at icann.org; Edmon Chung
> *Subject:* Re: [UA-discuss] Regarding "RTL"
>
>
>
> Thanks Brent, Alireza & Edmon.
>
>
>
> This is a very interesting question of the approach that a software
> supplier might take.
>
>
>
> I have two questions:
>
>
>
> 1) Where are e-mail solution providers gathering to discuss this?   Does a
> forum already exist?  if not, should the UASG create one?
>
>
>
> 2) Brent:  How has Gmail approached this?  Ignored the dots in the
> username side of the address?
>
>
>
> I think it’s very interesting.
>
>
>
> Don
>
>
>
>
>
>  On 24/02/2015, at 1:18 pm, Brent London <brentlondon at google.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> It becomes problematic, as Edmon mentioned, when there are dots in both
> sides. It's especially confusing if both sides contain a string that
> plausibly could be a TLD:
>
>
>
> customer.care@شزذ.يثب
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Brent London
>
> brentlondon at google.com
>
> +1 650-214-5206
>
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 5:46 AM, Alireza Saleh <saleh+ua at nic.ir> wrote:
>
>  There is no problem as long as the usernames starts and ends with a
> character with a property of AL (Arabic Letter), R (Right to left) or L
> (Left to right) otherwise in a LTR context it may jump around @ sign and
> make the address unreadable. The email address may also become unreadable
> in LTR context If the username part starts with L and ends with AL like :
>
>
>
> testمثال@مثال.تست
>
>
>
> the red part is username.
>
>
>
> -Alireza
>
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 22, 2015, at 11! :47 AM, Edmon Chung <edmon at registry.asia> wrote:
>
>
>
>    What about where the username part contains a dot or other separators?
> Is there a difference between “.” And “-“ or “_”?
>
>
>
> tld.sld at name.user ?
>
> tld.sld at name-user / tld.sld at user-name ?
>
> etc.?
>
>
>
> Edmon
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org
> <ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Alireza Saleh
> *Sent:* Sunday, February 22, 2015 4:07 PM
> *To:* Edmon Chung
> *Cc:* ua-discuss at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [UA-discuss] Regarding "RTL"
>
>
>
> This is very interesting question. I’ve also thought about it before. This
> is a new topic and there is no similar experiences. I don’t have exact
> answer to this question but overall I think people mainly prefer the RTL
> version with right alignement. however the bidi property of @ allows its
> usage in the middle of RTL texts without creating any confusions unlike
> <http://>.
>
>
>
> نام@مثال.آزمایشی <%D9%86%D8%A7%D9%85 at xn--mgbh0fb.xn--hgbk6aj7f53bba>
>
> TLD.SLD at NAME
>
>
>
>
>
> *-Alireza*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *On Feb 22, 2015, at 4:01 AM, Edmon Chung <edmon at registry.asia
> <edmon at registry.asia>> wrote:*
>
>
>
>  *That applies to email (EAI) addresses as well I suppose?*
>
> *Which Brent has been bringing up.*
>
> *So, within a RTL ! context (e.g. if the user interface or other elements
> are RTL) one should expect*
>
>
>
> *tld.domain at name.user:mailto <tld.domain at name.user:mailto>*
>
>
>
> *Is that correct Alireza?*
>
>
>
> *Edmon*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:*
>
>
>
> * ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org
> <ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org
> <ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org>] On Behalf Of Alireza Saleh Sent: Sunday,
> February 22, 2015 2:54 AM To: Mark Svancarek Cc: ua-discuss at icann.org
> <ua-discuss at icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Regarding "RTL"*
>
>
>
> *Dear Mark, *
>
>
>
> *Just a quick note about your question, it is expected the label starts
> from the right side of the address baar, and from right to left. So the
> main issue would be the alignment. Natively it should look like:*
>
>
>
> *com.microsoft.www://http*
>
>
>
> *-Alireza*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *On Feb 20, 2015, at 10:35 PM, Mark Svancarek <marksv at microsoft.com
> <marksv at microsoft.com>> wrote:*
>
>
>
>    *Hi, I had some questions regarding my recent usage of the term
> “RTL”.  By this I mean “right to left”, a characteristic of Arabic and
> Hebrew.  At Microsoft we also call this “bidi” (bidirectional).*
>
>
>
> *Here’s a discussion regarding RTL.  (I’ve also attached a much more
> detailed explanation, which includes Microsoft’s recommendations, but it’s
> in PowerPoint.  Hopefully you already! use a compatible viewer.)*
>  *Bidi display of IRIs (URLs/URIs)*
>
> *Bidirectional display of IRIs (an IRI with some Right-To-Left characters,
> eg: Arabic) has some odd quirks.  There’s an IETF WG working on creating an
> IRI RFC.  It’d be nice if we could help ensure that there were reasonable
> standards for the display of bidi IRIs.  The existing IRI drafts suggest
> using the Unicode Bidi Algorithm to display IRIs, but that has some
> problems.*
>
>
>
> User and government feedback indicates that our current behavior is a bit
> unexpected.  Currently we have some odd quirks about the display of Bidi
> IRIs in Microsoft.  This is just an example, other places may have
> different odd quirks.
>
>
>
> *Logical Order*
>
> *IE with LTR context*
>
> *IE with RTL context*
>
> http://www.microsoft.com
>
> http://www.microsoft.com
>
> http://www.microsoft.com
>
> http://اا1اا.بب2بب.ةة3ةة <http://xn--1-ymcaba.xn--2-0mcaba.xn--3-2mcaba/>
>
> http://اا1اا.بب2بب.ةة3ةة <http://xn--1-ymcaba.xn--2-0mcaba.xn--3-2mcaba/>
>
> http://اا1اا.بب2بب.ةة3ةة <http://xn--1-ymcaba.xn--2-0mcaba.xn--3-2mcaba/>
>
> http://a1a.اا2اا.بب3بب.d4d <http://a1a.xn--2-ymcaba.xn--3-0mcaba.d4d/>
>
> http://a1a.اا2اا.بب3بب.d4d <http://a1a.xn--2-ymcaba.xn--3-0mcaba.d4d/>
>
> http://a1a.اا2اا.بب3بب.d4d <http://a1a.xn--2-ymcaba.xn--3-0mcaba.d4d/>
>
> http://*اا*1*اا*.b2b.c3c.بب4بب <http://xn--1-ymcaba.b2b.c3c.xn--4-0mcaba/>
>
> http://اا1اا.b2b.c3c.بب4بب <http://xn--1-ymcaba.b2b.c3c.xn--4-0mcaba/>
>
> http://اا1اا.b2b.c3c.بب4بب <http://xn--1-ymcaba.b2b.c3c.xn--4-0mcaba/>
>
>
> ...
>
> [Message clipped]
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <mailer-daemon at googlemail.com>
> To: dusan at dukes.in.rs
> Cc:
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 08:04:19 +0000
> Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
> Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
>
>      com.gmail at dusan.stojicevic
>
> Technical details of permanent failure:
> DNS Error: Address resolution of dusan.stojicevic. failed: Domain name not
> found
>
> ----- Original message -----
>
> X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
>         d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
>
> h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to
>          :subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
>         bh=oV7WQ8lryXPSsTVyIzYLp3QZdFh+3U95bpv4Okv/xjI=;
>
> b=QqLxV2xWblSmXtEvb8ak92Y3nnpQMC6pqDr5pp817ubddgmuUJqPdviXYpj0UTqa+V
>
>  X8+F7jISs2TUpugEXyFYwG9OVo9AbD5tbgvYd+L+sZhEicjmJ1VkK10yCcj2g/4Lll1F
>
>  NQjLy+uL7xhiXudx3DRVN3FebiZ9MT2mf8NWNHfJzodeTiQqfTZ39spVDzuZJUoID3WR
>
>  j4wSf1iVpBKximpwxU/PXSPF1exepSDJBGNSk/XX6DCKEpl3AmemheU/52Bs1xO5Cf/i
>
>  uEt66tW5W5ufTLKtRaOH/BnPFHTUtpnT26txciwpZI8zuGPm0GNefFFhbOwQjggFxLrf
>          93hA==
> X-Gm-Message-State:
> ALoCoQlQhBKx8PrtsJjuCaKmlNYZK/+74aUgVNjwV2wkNFRmTp/ZveDMMVEMS/l7lo4b9aGuvha/
> X-Received: by 10.180.77.166 with SMTP id t6mr28567023wiw.28.1424765057763;
>         Tue, 24 Feb 2015 00:04:17 -0800 (PST)
> Return-Path: <dusan at dukes.in.rs>
> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (178-221-219-238.dynamic.isp.telekom.rs.
> [178.221.219.238])
>         by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id
> s5sm23757985wia.1.2015.02.24.00.04.15
>         for <com.gmail at dusan.stojicevic>
>         (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
>         Tue, 24 Feb 2015 00:04:16 -0800 (PST)
> Message-ID: <54EC3080.1080807 at dukes.in.rs>
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 09:04:16 +0100
> From: Dusan Stojicevic <dusan at dukes.in.rs>
> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101
> Thunderbird/31.4.0
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> To: com.gmail at dusan.stojicevic
> Subject: proba
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 150223-1, 02/23/2015), Outbound message
> X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
>
>
>
> ---
> Ova e-pošta je provjerena na viruse Avast protuvirusnim programom.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/private/ua-discuss/attachments/20150224/fda2291e/attachment.html>