[UA-discuss] Regarding "RTL"
Dusan Stojicevic
dusan at dukes.in.rs
Tue Feb 24 23:01:15 UTC 2015
Thanks, Brent, and I agree with Mark.
Dušan
On 24.2.2015 23:56, Mark Svancarek wrote:
>
> Yes, this is my concern. I think we have an opportunity to set
> well-defined expectations and ensure implementations converge to them.
>
> /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. /
>
> *From:*ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Brent London
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 24, 2015 2:52 PM
> *To:* Dusan Stojicevic
> *Cc:* ua-discuss at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [UA-discuss] Regarding "RTL"
>
> 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 heade! r. 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 <http://gmail.com>
> addresses, which is doable because Gmail controls the gmail.com
> <http://gmail.com> namespace. So hello.world at gmail.com
> <mailto:hello.world at gmail.com> goes to the same user as
> helloworld at gmail.com <mailto:helloworld at gmail.com>. We can't, however,
> do that for other domains. For example, helloworld at outlook.com
> <mailto:helloworld at outlook.com> and hello.world at outlook.com
> <mailto: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 <mailto:brentlondon at google.com>
>
> +1 650-214-5206
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:16 AM, Dusan Stojicevic <dusan at dukes.in.rs
> <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <http://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>
> [mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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
> <mailto:customer.care@%D8%B4%D8%B2%D8%B0.%D9%8A%D8%AB%D8%A8>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Brent London
>
> brentlondon at google.com <mailto:brentlondon at google.com>
>
> +1 650-214-5206 <tel:650-214-5206>
>
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 5:46 AM, Alireza Saleh
> <saleh+ua at nic.ir <mailto: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
> <mailto:test%D9%85%D8%AB%D8%A7%D9%84@%D9%85%D8%AB%D8%A7%D9%84.%D8%AA%D8%B3%D8%AA>
>
> the red part is username.
>
> -Alireza
>
> On Feb 22, 2015, at 11! :47 AM, Edmon Chung
> <edmon at registry.asia <mailto: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 <mailto:tld.sld at name.user> ?
>
> tld.sld at name-user <mailto:tld.sld at name-user> /
> tld.sld at user-name <mailto:tld.sld at user-name> ?
>
> etc.?
>
> Edmon
>
> *From:*ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org> [mailto: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
> <mailto: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
> <mailto:%D9%86%D8%A7%D9%85 at xn--mgbh0fb.xn--hgbk6aj7f53bba>
>
> TLD.SLD at NAME <mailto:TLD.SLD at NAME>
>
> __
>
> __
>
> _-Alireza_
>
> __
>
> __
>
> __
>
> _On Feb 22, 2015, at 4:01 AM, Edmon Chung
> <edmon at registry.asia <mailto: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
> <mailto:tld.domain at name.user:mailto>_
>
> __
>
> _Is that correct Alireza?_
>
> __
>
> _Edmon_
>
> __
>
> __
>
> __
>
> *_From:_*_ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org> [mailto: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
> <mailto: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
> <mailto: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://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
> <mailto:mailer-daemon at googlemail.com>>
> To: dusan at dukes.in.rs <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <http://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 <mailto:dusan at dukes.in.rs>>
> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (178-221-219-238.dynamic.isp.telekom.rs
> <http://178-221-219-238.dynamic.isp.telekom.rs>. [178.221.219.238])
> by mx.google.com <http://mx.google.com> with ESMTPSA id
> s5sm23757985wia.1.2015.02.24.00.04.15
> for <com.gmail at dusan.stojicevic
> <mailto: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
> <mailto:54EC3080.1080807 at dukes.in.rs>>
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 09:04:16 +0100
> From: Dusan Stojicevic <dusan at dukes.in.rs <mailto: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 <mailto: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
>
---
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/20150225/dea42553/attachment.html>
More information about the UA-discuss
mailing list