-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 25/07/13 11:10, Melvin Carvalho wrote: > I think maybe what you are getting at is that you think using > user@domain as the single identifier for a lot of different things > (email, chat, files, voip, social, etc) is a really bad idea. You > don't have to like it, but user@domain is still the most commonly > used identifier there is. To embrace it is hardly being intolerant, > it is just being practical and backward compatible. > > > Embracing email as part of a holistic identity strategy could be > practical. But if it's using email as the 'one identity to rule > them all' -- it's going to be fractured by nature.
I don't think the suggestion is to use email addresses as universal identifiers, but simply to use the user@domain format, which is memorisable, easily recognised, and clearly represents the user/service provider relationship. However, using one format for multiple services is confusing - already I can't put my Jabber ID on my business card without explaining that it's not an email address. Perhaps it would be appropriate to use different separators for different services - user#domain, user*domain, etc? Cheers, Michael -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJR8P2XAAoJEBEET9GfxSfMTBcIAKcxwJmhxQD3GqdggYZcL0QT KXlSJRuOZ/Y8L+97MRKTvSzOroNS5Gk6tIdv62V5OdPZGRejfqbYtFH6N94u7ApS ycIUCqxG83mLiDvb2I/5p7lANu60nV388OGfWlacqM2a5kYv5oB4N7f69Ci1LwCs rU5MiQ8Z1QQBYPvv3WAJnNoZjQdjG77f1GXYyRLYa37tvQaaK6DCUhrnSr8sTY5B N76fZDfOQJwu4Bdj/2r7H0tE+2IzkowEUYdCT//V75fCpyXRRd4SB6HYMk4jRJ1a y34UUiOKbCrshlw/N6McV31KzgkirLQONDpKM+ORdKlFKE+titArHwlUfOUnvso= =J38N -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
