Re: Complexity for case-sensitive systems

On 06:35 23/04/03, Adam M. Costello said:
>"J-F C. (Jefsey)  Morfin" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Does anyone know of any case-sensitive local parts that actually
> > > exist?
> >
> > There seem to be a consistent demand for case-sensitivity in the mail
> > exchanges (the way the mailbox is named is another yet similar type of
> > response).  A simple example is the consistent desire to be able to be
> > polite and able to send mails (and to see them received as such) to
> > "M.le.Président@République.Française.gouv.fr"
>
>I'm asking about case-sensitivity, not case-preservation.  Your example
>is case-sensitive if mail addressed to m.le.pésident bounces or goes to
>a different mailbox than mail addressed to M.le.Président.  The current
>IMAA draft deliberately lacks support for mail servers that act that
>way, so I'm wondering if there exist any mail servers that act that way.

Dear Adam,
Sorry for my Franglish I suppose. I said that we asked about 
case-sensitivity and detailed more the responses as far as 
case-preservation was concerned. I said that the way the mailbox is named 
(case-sensitivity) was another yet similar response.

The reason why I say it was another response is that we have not get enough 
experience in properly wording our question (I ran that questionnaire as I 
explained on some WSIS fora or meetings, so with peole familiar of the 
Internet but not necessarily of the systems). But I also said it was 
similar because repsonses goes the same way (but are less documented and 
with far more "I don't know").

The feeling (to be confirmed) is that people expect today what Windows 
permits them to do (because this is their day to day life). But they also 
are unhappy at what Windows does not permit them to do (case sensitivity). 
I note that the kind of groups we polled where common enough not to be more 
Unix oriented than the average population.

One of the reason why case-sentivity is important was sorting. But mainly 
it was consistency (one unique consistent spelling) and legal aspects. When 
a word is printed in a way in a law, changing it makes the one which 
changes it responsible. If there is a misrouting due to the way it has been 
differently printed, the responsibility lies with the recieving party. So 
the e-government's demand is that mailboxes are made consistent with the 
legal name and title of the persons and offices. It was explained to me 
that this was the reason why many Judges did not accept faxes (because the 
fax number might not be the one of the proper person), ... and why many 
Judges accept faxes (because the writing of the number is even) and not 
mails, because there is no law on the mail address spelling.

Obviously a law on LHS woud address the concern (do you have one in the 
USA?). I tried to call the Rep who introduced the DN related parts in the 
current French law on the Internet. But did not get him yet on the phone.

jfc

PS. There is also another aspect someone rose at length, but it should be 
confirmed by IP lawyers (IANAL): models (and TMs) maybe registered in using 
upper/lower cases. For example "LaRoy". If the spelling is not protected: 
it may be legally lost. So a mail sent to [email protected] which would be 
accepted might be a proof that "LaRoy" is not protected by its owner?















>AMC
>
>
>
>---
>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.463 / Virus Database: 262 - Release Date: 17/03/03