Disqus - Latest Comments for dominicsayers

Re: Moist flapjack with condensed milk

Dominic Sayers — Wed, 14 Oct 2020 11:50:54 -0000

In this case I think you probably can, Yassar. Don't try this with Banoffee Pie though!

Let me know how it goes.

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Wed, 25 Oct 2017 04:29:08 -0000

Thanks Matsuko. I don't think there's anything I can easily do about that because a slash is a valid part of a URL and there's no fancy routing software in front of this website. So at the moment it's just ignoring everything after the slash.

I'll have a think but I don't have much time to maintain this site, sorry.

Suggestions gratefully received.

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Sun, 19 Jun 2016 03:43:45 -0000

Enter your address. Click "Test" and read the answer: http://isemail.info/Wmflomo...

Re: The myth of the driverless cars revolution

Dominic Sayers — Tue, 07 Jun 2016 07:13:13 -0000

Actuaries will work out that cars are safer when they are driving themselves, so the insurance companies will offer lower premiums to drivers who use autopilot as much as possible. Paul Whitehouse will appear in adverts telling us he lets his car drive itself and saves money.

Re: Running Ubuntu with DHCP on Hyper-V over WIFI — matt wrock's software development blog

Dominic Sayers — Tue, 15 Dec 2015 07:39:26 -0000

Genius. Thank you.

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Tue, 03 Nov 2015 14:00:52 -0000

I'm very happy to merge a pull request if you'd like to make the necessary changes

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Thu, 28 May 2015 11:26:29 -0000

The validation is intended to be technically correct, and it's not really an end-user service. In a real-world app I'd expect you to punycode the user's input before validation, then use the information returned from is_email to provide a meaningful message to the user.

Many MTAs successfully pass on messages addressed to really strange email addresses. That doesn't mean those addresses are conformant. You should probably warn a user that he or she has entered an address that might not get sent reliably but allow them to use it if they insist. See http://isemail.info/about

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Sun, 24 May 2015 09:54:41 -0000

In order to transfer emails at international domains like this, the address has to be encoded so that it conforms to the standards. This encoding is called punycode and it's outside the scope of this validator. (I could add it but the validator is here to validate email addresses, not encode/decode them)

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Fri, 15 May 2015 04:02:57 -0000

Read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

If it still isn't clear then ask again and I'll explain.

Re: Three Colours Ped: A Trio Of Different Boris Bikes In One Photo

Dominic Sayers — Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:46:43 -0000

Mudchute DLR this morning

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Tue, 17 Mar 2015 11:24:43 -0000

The `Local-part` of the address is defined here: https://tools.ietf.org/html...

It uses the definition of `atext` from RFC 5322 https://tools.ietf.org/html...

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 04:18:47 -0000

Not sure why you'd pay for something that is available free but I have some magic beans you might be interested in...

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Tue, 11 Nov 2014 04:48:29 -0000

Thanks for perservering!

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Tue, 11 Nov 2014 04:43:46 -0000

Hi Matt,

I tried and failed to define a binary test for "valid" and "invalid" because there are contexts where a particular email is valid and other contexts where it isn't.

Look at the list of result codes here: https://github.com/dominics...

Each has a category, and you should use this rather than a numeric value to determine which addresses are valid in your context.

You might decide that ISEMAIL_VALID_CATEGORY, ISEMAIL_DNSWARN and
ISEMAIL_RFC5321 are your valid categories. This will allow TLD addresses and addresses at non-existent domains as well as "normal" addresses.

Hope this helps.

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Fri, 18 Jul 2014 04:44:35 -0000

Great question!

The standardized-tag has to be a member of the list held by IANA here: http://www.iana.org/assignm...

At the moment this list has one member: "IPv6"

Anything else, therefore, is currently not a standardized-tag.

is_email has no means of checking whether any more members have been added to this list, but luckily the test is still valid :-)

You may have spotted a logical inconsistency here. I took the view that we shoudn't validate TLDs because more could be added at any time. Indeed many additional TLDs *have* been added since I last worked on this code. On the other hand, is_email validates against a snapshot of a standardized-tag list that might go out-of-date at any time. Just because it hasn't doesn't mean I was right!

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 04:41:03 -0000

If you submit a pull request here I'd be very glad to consider it: https://github.com/dominics...

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 04:40:19 -0000

Historically TLDs have always been 2 characters or more, but there's nothing to stop ICANN issuing a 1 character TLD if they choose to do so.

More detail: there's nothing in the RFCs to stop them doing it. The aim of isemail is to embody the principles of the RFCs. It's possible there is an ICANN policy document stating that they will never issue a 1 character TLD but that's outside the scope of isemail. If they submit their policy as an RFC then we would be inclined to add it.

Re: The kids are alright

Dominic Sayers — Fri, 30 May 2014 10:15:00 -0000

Seconded

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Thu, 08 May 2014 04:27:48 -0000

If you would like to add RFC 6531 compatibility then I'll happily accept a pull request here https://github.com/dominics...

It may be some time before all the world's MTAs can handle non-ASCII email addresses though.

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Thu, 08 May 2014 04:23:11 -0000

Your email address is valid. I have no idea why any other web site says it isn't.

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Wed, 26 Mar 2014 08:37:07 -0000

Why do you doubt it?

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Sat, 01 Mar 2014 17:51:46 -0000

Hi Will. You're right. I'll try to update the link when I can.

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Sat, 01 Mar 2014 17:50:35 -0000

Hi Colin. It would be helpful if you quoted the relevant RFC when you make assertions like "x is not allowed"

I agree the diagnostic message for this example is not perfect. It would be better to cite RFC 5321 section 4.1.2 where quoted-pairSMTP is defined as a backslash followed by any ASCII character in the range %d32-126. In other words, the diagnosis is correct: this is a valid email address.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/...

Re: NHS: What is the Hospital Closure Clause?

Dominic Sayers — Fri, 28 Feb 2014 07:57:15 -0000

The link is still broken after 5 days. Seems there is little point commenting here.

Re: Is this email address valid?

Dominic Sayers — Fri, 28 Feb 2014 07:54:44 -0000

There seems little point supporting this RFC until there are a majority of servers in the wild that use SMTPUTF8 (http://serverfault.com/ques....

Until then an address that uses non-ASCII characters will be transmitted on a best-efforts basis, so validation against a standard isn't really possible.

I would be very happy to accept a pull request that adds support for this RFC if anyone wants to make one here https://github.com/dominics....