3 ms·

It seems there are weird things you can use in an email address that nobody does, as a result what is used and considered to be an email address has matured. If

by Kequc 11y ago

It seems there are weird things you can use in an email address that nobody does, as a result what is used and considered to be an email address has matured. If you create an email address that is weird, in practice you'll be less capable of using it. The weirder it is the fewer web forms or software you'll successfully put it into. I think we can just say no, functionally, you cannot put comments or additional @ symbols into your email address. It hasn't worked for long enough, people know you just aren't supposed to do it. I'd be surprised if you were allowed to create such a thing signing up for bing for example. You probably need to be the administrator of some chaotic UNIX server with full DNS, in order to force it to happen at this point. Even Google Chrome's built in email field validation doesn't allow you to do it. I shouldn't be expected to jump through the hoops necessary in order to allow "technically valid" email addresses that someone went out of their way to make, when I could more easily suggest they use a normal one.

Spivak 11y ago
> I shouldn't be expected to jump through the hoops necessary in order to allow "technically valid" email addresses that someone went out of their way to make, when I could more easily suggest they use a normal one. I really hope you don't work on anything important if your stance is, "I shouldn't be expected to implement specifications correctly because it's easier to only implement part of it." Why are we even having this discussion? Implement it correctly once, put it in a library and never worry about it again. You don't have to jump through any hoops, you're only making more work for yourself by implementing the standard incorrectly and then having to deal with customers that think that the ITEF standard is more valid than your personal definition of what an email address should be. If your code is passed down the line and eventually hits someone who writes unit tests for actual valid email addresses then your name is going to come up on the git blame when it fails.
- Kequc 11y ago
  Even Gmail, what I would consider a gold standard, only allows letters, numbers, and periods. So when you're done accusing me of not being someone viable for a position anywhere important maybe you should send a message outlining the same argument to Google.
  - Spivak 11y ago
    Huh, Gmail completely implements RFC5321 and you can send and receive email from any valid address, even from their web client, and they validate the email address. I stand by my position, failing to implement the spec correctly should be considered an error even when Google does it. If you want a compromise, how about printing "we don't support email addresses with X" if you want to be picky for SPAM detection, simplicity, or something rather than "this email address isn't valid." Google does this for some valid-but-not-accepted addresses on their signup page but it's not sophisticated enough to catch everything.

by Kequc 11y ago

Spivak 11y ago

> I shouldn't be expected to jump through the hoops necessary in order to allow "technically valid" email addresses that someone went out of their way to make, when I could more easily suggest they use a normal one. I really hope you don't work on anything important if your stance is, "I shouldn't be expected to implement specifications correctly because it's easier to only implement part of it." Why are we even having this discussion? Implement it correctly once, put it in a library and never worry about it again. You don't have to jump through any hoops, you're only making more work for yourself by implementing the standard incorrectly and then having to deal with customers that think that the ITEF standard is more valid than your personal definition of what an email address should be. If your code is passed down the line and eventually hits someone who writes unit tests for actual valid email addresses then your name is going to come up on the git blame when it fails.

Kequc 11y ago
Even Gmail, what I would consider a gold standard, only allows letters, numbers, and periods. So when you're done accusing me of not being someone viable for a position anywhere important maybe you should send a message outlining the same argument to Google.
- Spivak 11y ago
  Huh, Gmail completely implements RFC5321 and you can send and receive email from any valid address, even from their web client, and they validate the email address. I stand by my position, failing to implement the spec correctly should be considered an error even when Google does it. If you want a compromise, how about printing "we don't support email addresses with X" if you want to be picky for SPAM detection, simplicity, or something rather than "this email address isn't valid." Google does this for some valid-but-not-accepted addresses on their signup page but it's not sophisticated enough to catch everything.