Hi Reid, > There is no reason to ever strip away the "comment" part of an email > address in the context of email. If something *is* stripping it out, > prehaps it should be changed to not do so.
For email, we store both parts, the email address and the display name, as separate attributes. This way, "Jeffrey Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and a later <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> will be seen as the same email address. > If we keep the email address intact, then we should be able to > extract the "comment" part of the email address and display it. Do we > keep the email address intact? We store these attributes separately in Chandler's data model, but when we construct the ModifiedByRecord for sharing to Cosmo, we only use the email address portion. I was suggesting we use a separate attribute for full name, but you're right, it'd be better to just use the existing field and use RC2822 syntax for display name + email address (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2822#section-3.4). Desktop import handles a display name + email address now, so if Cosmo worked with this, that'd be great, we'd just need to tweak the way we export ModifiedByRecords. Sincerely, Jeffrey _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
