Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: > > Over time everyone will own their own DNS domain > and it will form the hub of their personal > communications system. All communication modes > will map onto the single unified communication identifier. >
I don't necessarily disagree with many of your arguments, but I wonder why — if everyone owns their own DNS domain — we even need the user@ portion anymore? Largely that was included because in the early days — and even today, for many people — their addresses were [EMAIL PROTECTED] My primary personal email address (not the one I use for mailing lists) is pretty redundant since the part before the @ is the same as the part after the @ once the parent domain has been excluded. Leaving off the user@ portion doesn't make the address any less "mine". > An 'email' address is simply the conventional conjunction of a > username portion and a DNS name portion. It need not be used only > for email, nor is it. It is routine for people to use RFC822 > addresses for Jabber and other instant messaging applications. Calling a Jabber ID an email address is a bit misleading. It's entirely possible for the email address [EMAIL PROTECTED] and the JID [EMAIL PROTECTED] to be owned/controlled by different people. It is not safe to assume that the two are the same person without evidence of that. What makes a string like "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" an email address is the fact that you can address email to it. The fact that the two addressing schemes use similar syntax doesn't help you much. _______________________________________________ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
