[jdev] confusion over user at domain JIDs and email addresses?
trejkaz at trypticon.org
Tue Jul 26 17:09:13 CDT 2005
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 00:30, Mario Salzer wrote:
> Consider for example a web page with textual content like follows:
> user: name
> jabber: creeesh at jabber.org
> popoflux: quit at example.com
> email: text at example.net
> Email harvesters would register all three. But which one would
> the average user pick for sending emails? Because of the identical
> syntax all three look like email addresses - but as the alerted
> reader has noticed, only one of them would work.
You have a few choices there.
1. Make it a *real* web page and hyperlink those addresses instead of putting
plaintext out on the web.
2. Put in the protocol prefixes (I've seen several signatures on this and
other mailing lists, which use xmpp: even in plaintext to distinguish it
from the email address.)
3. Hope that users are rocket scientists, so that they would understand that
the field prefixed by "email" is likely to be the *email*, whereas the
field prefixed by "Jabber" is likely to be the *Jabber* ID. :-)
> But are typical AOL users really that dumb? And must @-strings be
> eschewed for anything but E-Mail addresses therefore?
Here's a question for the future. If XMPP ever becomes the means of sending
email, why can't it use the @, since it would then BE an email address?
At that point in the future, your Jabber ID might be linked as
mailto:bob at example.com
...even though that may be a Jabber ID. :-)
Wouldn't it be easier if the email formats on both networks were the same?
How would your "AOL user" (who seems to be somewhat similar to Aunt Tillie)
deal with needing to remember two different address formats when they're
using the one client?
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza <trejkaz at trypticon.org>
Web site: http://trypticon.org/
Jabber ID: trejkaz at jabber.zim.net.au
GPG Fingerprint: 9EEB 97D7 8F7B 7977 F39F A62C B8C7 BC8B 037E EA73
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the JDev