In article <f18ac70a-da1a-4b10-8a20-d0699617cf65@gulbrandsen.priv.no> you write:
On Monday 29 April 2019 04:15:36 CEST, Paul Borokhov via UA-EAI wrote:
I suspect anyone who’s fluent in any Nordic language would strongly disagree with this guidance, which is what Asmus is hinting at.
I am fluent, and I don't strongly disagree with the guidance.
It's not marvellously good, but it's not terrible either. Committee stuff.
The right rules depend on who the users of a mail system are and who they correspond with. Mail addresses are very different from IDNs in that only the system that handles the mail does the address matching so every system has different matching rules. (This is how it is now, EAI doesn't change that.) If you had a mail system where you expected all of the users and their correspondents to be writing in Nordic languages, it could make sense to match vowels strictly since everyone would know the difference between å and ä or ø and ö. On the other hand, if the users correspond with people elsewhere in Europe or the Americas who know the Latin script but not the Nordic languages, it would make sense to do more fuzzing for, e.g., people who copied the address off a business card but got the accents wrong. I think we can express general principles like don't have two addresses that differ only in confusables that go to different mailboxes, while leaving the degree of fuzz up to the individual system managers. It doesn't seem to confuse people too much that Gmail ignores dots in its ASCII addresses while nobody else does. That's the degree of variation we're already used to. R's, John