Re: First strawman for UTF-8 headers proposal

If you're going to use new field names, you need to include the old 
fields (with ASCII equivalent addresses) also, for compatibility with 
existing mail handling tools.

And if you're going to do that, you might as well encode the UTF-8 
fields somehow, to keep them from causing trouble with existing tools 
(though fewer in number) that barf on currently-illegal input even in 
header fields that they do not use.

Keith

On Friday, November 28, 2003, at 09:08  PM, Adam M. Costello wrote:

> Hence I think it might be a good idea to use new field-names for the
> UTF-8-enabled fields, to reduce the chance of accidentally misleading
> old software.  If there is an algorithmic way to determine the syntax
> of the new-style Foo field given the syntax of the old-style Foo field,
> then there should also be a way to algorithmically associate the name 
> of
> the new-style Foo field with the name Foo.