Comment 63 for bug 369150

(In reply to comment #62)
> I'd be happy to get rid of the whole encoding/quoting until immediately
> before sending. Do you think it's safe if we'd just handle everything until
> the angled address as the display name? That would also solve the current
> problem with the first example—but I fear there will be a pitfall somewhere.

Well, it would probably take me two weeks to figure out the path these strings are taking thru the code, and another week or more to figure out how that actually works, so I'm not the one to comment on whether it's safe. Certainly within the compose window's edit fields, it should be fine to deal with each address as a Unicode string using whatever method of special-char quoting works (e.g., you might backslash-escape the comma, rather than quoting the name, if that does the trick).

The issue of not decoding atoms until you're in a situation where you *need* the Unicode representation is a different question. That may not be feasible in the current architecture, but see e.g. bug 314351. I was only suggesting that it might work out to be more maintainable if the 2047 atoms were kept, where possible -- it's quite possible the opposite would be true.

(Incidentally, if you're working on this area, you might take bug 318705 into consideration. Bug 180025 may also be affected.)