On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 12:39:26PM +1100, Ken Foskey wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-11-03 at 12:13 +1100, Martin Pool wrote:
> > On 3 November 2011 12:02, Ken Foskey <kfos...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
> > >> This is NOT a email scammer call, it is a business that is emailing and
> > >> wants their emails to be 'as valid as possible' before delivery.
> >
> > Why do a separate prior check?
> >
> > Sending with a few dead addresses shouldn't have any real cost. Then
> > later you can see how many bounce, how many have their images loaded,
> > how many are clicked-through-from or otherwise responded to.
>
> Problem is that the emails have been collected and not used yet. I did
> this at another company an 10% did not pass simple validation.
>
> Getting back 100's of bounced messages is bad and sending too many
> bounced emails will increase your spam count. If these can be filtered
> out it would save everyone a lot of trouble.
>
> I have implemented a reasonable Regex and DNS lookup on input and this
> helped a lot with quality, immediate feedback is the best way because
> the person keying can recheck their details.
It's not java (its ruby) but I this might give you ideas:
http://theshed.hezmatt.org/email-address-validator/index.html
The author Matt Palmer is a slugger
Speaking of which, it's probably better to email slug rather than
coders for this query. This goes for anyone query that is not
narrowly hardcore coding for that matter. And even then maybe not.
Matt H
_______________________________________________
coders mailing list
coders@slug.org.au
http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/coders
