[UA-discuss] Progress on HTML and email...

[Jothan Frakes]

To me, personally speaking, both a-label and u-label should be "universally
accepted" in forms.

In a utopian world, it should just be the u-label always, but that assumes
everything works correctly everywhere with ux, forms and what not.

It has been my experience that if someone is entering an a-label they are
not the standard user, and they are doing so to override ux concerns and
eai.  They have some understanding of how a/u works, have something
functional with the domain name, and are wanting to ensure that the domain
they entered works correctly, bypassing the ux / other systems (eai) that
may not be working as expected.

If a person filling out a form takes the initiative on entering the
appropriate registry's a-label, they should not be penalized for it.



On Nov 13, 2017 15:56, "Richard Merdinger" <rmerdinger at godaddy.com> wrote:

> Mark,
> I can’t speak for the spec itself, but there should be some normalization
> that takes place so that the user can input either the u-label or the
> a-label form.  If the spec doesn’t allow for this flexibility, I think is
> should be augmented to do so.
>
> Richard Merdinger
> VP, Domains
> rmerdinger at godaddy.com
>
>
>
> On 11/13/17, 10:24 AM, "UA-discuss on behalf of Mark Svancarek via
> UA-discuss" <ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org on behalf of
> ua-discuss at icann.org> wrote:
>
>     My interpretation is that the user is a human who must enter a string
> of text into a web form, where it is cast as type Email (which can
> subsequently be converted into ULABELs if the typed-in string includes
> ALABELs).
>
>     It's the first part, where the human user is typing an ALABEL into a
> web form, that concerns me.
>
>     Is this the wrong interpretation?
>
>     -----Original Message-----
>     From: UA-discuss [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of
> Andrew Sullivan
>     Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2017 10:34 PM
>     To: ua-discuss at icann.org
>     Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Progress on HTML and email...
>
>     On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 05:47:20AM +0000, Mark Svancarek via
> UA-discuss wrote:
>     >
>     > The assumption is that all local parts are ASCII letters-digits and
> that IDNs in the domain part should be expressed in punycode.  This is of
> course doubly broken, because humans can’t really use punycode.
>     >
>     > Fixing the local part is a good start and I encourage it.  But if
> the domain name part continues to prohibit Unicode, it won’t actually help
> anyone.
>     >
>
>     The domain part does not actually prohibit Unicode in the strict
> sense.  There's a note in the document that says
>
>         This syntax allows e-mail addresses with Internationalised Domain
>         Names using punycode, such as example at xn--d1acpjx3f.xn--p1ai. A
>         user agent should represent that in the user interface as
>         example@яндекс.рф
>
>     So, the user-agent is asked to do the IDNA transformation from A-label
> to U-label for display purposes.  Since under IDNA2008 that ought to be a
> 1:1 and fully reversible operation, it shouldn't be a big deal.
>     It's true that this input restriction won't produce an EAI address,
> but that is trivial to fix, also, if you do the IDNA transformation.
>
>     Best regards,
>
>     A
>
>     --
>     Andrew Sullivan
>     ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ua-discuss/attachments/20171113/b8555cc3/attachment.html>