2 ms·

> where are e-mail addresses currently at in that evolution? Baby shoes because of anglosphere programmers that can't fathom people wanting to use their own al

> where are e-mail addresses currently at in that evolution? Baby shoes because of anglosphere programmers that can't fathom people wanting to use their own alphabets and thus forget to support it.

xeromal 5y ago
This is a pretty pessimistic take. The real answer lies somewhere between budget and speed. If someone asked me to support non-latin alphabet, I'd have no idea where to start and the amount of people that would use that feature isn't worth the consideration. It's not that I don't fathom it, it's that I don't have time for that shit.
crazygringo 5y ago
You don't need to be so accusatory or ungenerous about it. Clearly "anglosphere programmers" fathom it every day when they use UTF-8 almost universally in webpages. Also, you know, things like emoji are pretty popular in the "anglosphere" as well. It's obvious that the real reason is an ancient e-mail RFC, and that while upgrading webpages to UTF-8 was relatively easy, in that it only needs 2 parties to support it -- the browser and the server -- upgrading e-mail is almost infinitely more complicated, because you have to wait for virtually all email code in the world to be upgraded, since an e-mail address is pretty useless if it doesn't work everywhere. It other words, it's a coordination problem. Not an ignorance problem. And unfortunately, Punycode [1] doesn't seem to be a particularly viable stepping-stone/compatibility solution here. E.g. if a user tries to use ドメイン名例@example.com and it fails, asking them to instead type in a seemingly-gibberish eckwd4c7cu47r2wf@example.com, where that could also conflict with a real e-mail address of that name. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punycode https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punycode
- Avamander 5y ago
  > You don't need to be so accusatory or ungenerous about it. At least four decades of mostly bad internationalization support it's no longer accusatory, it's empirical and quite generously worded.

> where are e-mail addresses currently at in that evolution? Baby shoes because of anglosphere programmers that can't fathom people wanting to use their own alphabets and thus forget to support it.

xeromal 5y ago

This is a pretty pessimistic take. The real answer lies somewhere between budget and speed. If someone asked me to support non-latin alphabet, I'd have no idea where to start and the amount of people that would use that feature isn't worth the consideration. It's not that I don't fathom it, it's that I don't have time for that shit.

crazygringo 5y ago

You don't need to be so accusatory or ungenerous about it. Clearly "anglosphere programmers" fathom it every day when they use UTF-8 almost universally in webpages. Also, you know, things like emoji are pretty popular in the "anglosphere" as well. It's obvious that the real reason is an ancient e-mail RFC, and that while upgrading webpages to UTF-8 was relatively easy, in that it only needs 2 parties to support it -- the browser and the server -- upgrading e-mail is almost infinitely more complicated, because you have to wait for virtually all email code in the world to be upgraded, since an e-mail address is pretty useless if it doesn't work everywhere. It other words, it's a coordination problem. Not an ignorance problem. And unfortunately, Punycode [1] doesn't seem to be a particularly viable stepping-stone/compatibility solution here. E.g. if a user tries to use ドメイン名例@example.com and it fails, asking them to instead type in a seemingly-gibberish eckwd4c7cu47r2wf@example.com, where that could also conflict with a real e-mail address of that name. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punycode https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punycode

Avamander 5y ago
> You don't need to be so accusatory or ungenerous about it. At least four decades of mostly bad internationalization support it's no longer accusatory, it's empirical and quite generously worded.