Tomasz Sterna wrote:
If you use it wrong, as in the example, or not use at all, you rely on guessing the rest from the context. And guessing, by its nature, is error prone. Especially when you lack metadata or knowledge (like Autn Tillie).
Sure, if it is an email address, it would only make sense to use the appropriate scheme prefix. I made that example especially misleading and exaggerated as I was only asking about the _potential_ confusion over the similarity. Of course I was speaking of web pages, where it is a snap to give email addresses correctly as useable links, which holds true as well for jabber then (xmpp: if it's registered somewhen, http://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes). What I was onto is the usage of purely informational identifiers, namely "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" (real domain) and their potential confusion to HUMANS (not the clients) - if not explicitely turned into an appropriate html link tag (because there exists no senseful protocol). It's still troublesome if you give @email and @jabber addresses as correctly protocol prefixed links but have a couple of textual [EMAIL PROTECTED] still elsewhere in a web page (people on occasion overlook links, and thereby copy&paste the wrong info). Ralph Meijer already answered the question I was onto - such user confusion exists (even for pages which clearly state the situation), it's just not measurable in hard numbers or such. _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list jdev@jabber.org http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
