Re: Question: Fullwidth double-quote and fullwidth backslash

   But are we really required, or do we see it as our goal,
   to help people avoid some potential typing mistakes in
   addresses that are, by their length and complexity, not
   at all user-friendly in the first place?

If we're going to support quoting in IMAs then I think my original
question is still a valid one.  We know that Japanese users (at least
those who are not intimately familliar with character set issues)
often consider full width and half width characters as equivalent and
interchangeable.  For this reason, the IDN group chose to accept full
with dot as equivalent to half width dot.

The IMAA base document suggests doing the same for at-sign, presumably
for the same reason.

*If* we are going to allow quoting in IMAs (that aren't plain 822
addresses) then it is a reasonable question to pose to the group as
to whether the same approach should be taken with the relevent
metacharacters.

If we're going to constuct a syntax for IMAs that involves double
quotes and backslash, then I think making an effort to ensure that
these are interpreted correctly by the software is sensible.

So I'm not sure I really understand your objection...

   -roy