At 01:32 PM 2/21/00 -0800, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
[snip]
>Does anyone know of any systems that actually enforce case
>sensitivity on a user name? I don't know of any, and I can't think of
>a time when I've run into one in modern times, but before I commit
>the heinous sin of deciding that the RFC is out of step with reality,
>I thought I'd bring the issue up.
I know that I was able to use the difference on a LISTSERV list
to get both a regular and digest sent to the same address, by
pretending they were different. :-)
I also have used this feature on outgoing mail, expecting it to
be honored so I can process replies to it with a case-sensitive
procmail recipe (even though they're all "me" as far as the
ISP is concerned).
I have a feeling there are some far corners of the world that we
don't hear much from, that are still running really old stuff, that
this might affect as well.
>Are there any reasons NOT to consider the entire email address as
>case insensitive? The advantages are great, especially in helping
>users find themselves in the listing. I really don't want to get into
>the issue of trying to decide if I should subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>if [EMAIL PROTECTED] is already subscribed.
Isn't it really the same problem as [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
and [EMAIL PROTECTED]? Sometimes they're the same; other times
they might be different (or different mailboxes, like shell vs. ppp).
>is there any reason NOT to ignore the RFCs here and go case insensitive?
How about that to do so makes it difficult to credibly criticize others
who violate other (probably more important) RFCs?
If there really aren't any anymore, it ought to be pretty trivial to
change the RFC, right? Go for it. :-)
Cheers,
Stan
