[UA-EAI] HTML 5.2 and Internationalized Eamil Addresses

[John C Klensin]

--On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 00:22 +0000 Mark Svancarek
<marksv at microsoft.com> wrote:

> Thanks for clarifying.
> 
> I am still puzzled, though.  Coremail and Xgenplus clearly
> demonstrate an ability to work around the spec, which perhaps
> renders the "significant annoyance" argument moot.  But I
> don't understand why one would resist changing a spec which is
> known to be "wrong" and non-RFC compliant.  Is the argument
> that revising it to be RFC-compliant would risk destabilizing
> more sites than fixing it?

Ask chaals  -- his committee.  My rather harsh comments apply
mostly if you want changes in 5.2.  I'm just guess9ing, but, if
you are willing to wait until late this calendar year for 5.2,
start working on 5.3 and hope to have a standard that does the
right thing sometime late in 2018, that is probably a lot easier
although some of the same considerations would still apply (see
chaals's note).

Also, be a little careful about "RFC-complaint.  There is no
"mandatory to implement" requirement for SMTPUTF8 or even
support for IDNA in email clients or servers.

   john