stellar-client
stellar-client copied to clipboard
stellar
Change the @ to * in the federation names
can you clarify this a little bit? is this just how we're displaying the federated names, or how people are typing them into send
Despite the hate I think we have to do this. It isn't an email address we shouldn't make it look like one.
what about DOMAIN:USER? or DOMAIN/USER, or in long form "stellar-federeation://DOMAIN/USER"?
stellar.org/nullstyle
stellar.org:nullstyle
nullstyle //default to stellar.org
I do, yes. For some reason the asterisk really offends my sensibilities for what an address should look like.
I also prefer saying "slash" to "asterisk" when telling someone my address.
FWIW, I'm fine with whatever we go with: My response to the * is purely subjective.
I prefer stellar.org/nullstyle fwiw
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Scott Fleckenstein < [email protected]> wrote:
I also prefer saying "slash" to "asterisk" when telling someone my address.
FWIW, I'm fine with whatever we go with: My response to the * is purely subjective.
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/stellar/stellar-client/issues/539#issuecomment-67371570 .
Although this structure is most recognizable as an email address, the @ symbol carries the correct, semantic definition.
A common contemporary use of @ is in email addresses (transmitted by SMTP), as in
[email protected](the userjdoelocated at site theexample.comdomain). BBN Technologies' Ray Tomlinson is credited with introducing this usage in 1971.[13] This idea of the symbol representing located at in the formuser@hostis also seen in other tools and protocols; for example, the Unix shell commandssh [email protected]tries to establish an ssh connection to the computer with the hostnameexample.netusing the usernamejdoe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At_sign
I'm not convinced "we have to do this."
you don't say "asterisk". you say "star!"
stellar.org/nullstyle is a URL so that is problematic
I am firmly in @deckar01 's camp. the @ symbol is universal for addressing some user @ a domain thought most associated with email, most people have a @gmail anyway, who certaintly won't be supporting stellar federated addresses anytime soon we'll soon see [email protected], which will clearly be a "send me stellars here" address not an email me address
Can you explain why you think having it look like an email address or a url is problematic for you @jedmccaleb?
Well one problem is you can't do things like: [email protected]*onecred.com that allows you to send STR to any email address.
The idea is that this is used as a way people request to be payed. Asking for someone to send you payment at [email protected] is way less clear than nullstyle*onecred.com
If people have never heard of stellar the 2nd will make them wonder, investigate and find out what we are. The first will need explanation if they have heard about stellar or not.
Look at all the sites that take btc. They can just put a bitcoin address at the bottom of their site and it is clear what they are saying. This would only be true for us if we use the star.
@ leaves people confused. People think that these guys that phished their account work at stellar.org since the phisher has a stellar.org email address.
Asking for someone to send you payment at [email protected] is way less clear than nullstyle*onecred.com
I disagree that it is less clear. If someone says "send me a payment at [email protected]", and they don't know what Stellar is, they will say how the hell do you want me to send it. If it's nullstyle*onecred.com, and they don't know about stellar, they will still say how the hell should i send it. If they know about stellar, they'll just have to mention "send me a payment to [email protected] on stellar."
@ leaves people confused. People think that these guys that phished their account work at stellar.org since the phisher has a stellar.org email address.
If that's the case we should change out federation domain to stellar-client.org or something
The idea is that this is used as a way people request to be payed. Asking for someone to send you payment at [email protected] is way less clear than nullstyle*onecred.com
IMO, the url form is not problematic in this way. "Send me a payment to stellar.org/nullstyle"
@ leaves people confused. People think that these guys that phished their account work at stellar.org since the phisher has a stellar.org email address.
Also not problematic in the url form.
If someone says "send me a payment at [email protected]", and they don't know what Stellar is, they will say how the hell do you want me to send it.
no they will just use paypal.
or venmo or google wallet... the requester will specify through which channel he would like to be paid
As I mentioned before, the * offends my sensibilities, but that is not a a blocking reason, IMO.
What about creating a URI prefix similar to mailto or http?
stellar:[email protected]
stellar://[email protected]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/URI_scheme
You would only need the [email protected] when typing in the send form, but when pasting your address on the web you use the full URI.
I think the idea is to keep it simple and novel. When someone sees a *, its the novelty that intrigues them.
@thejollyrogers Novel may be intriguing, but it could become a burden for developers. Instead of the URI parser that has already been built in your favorite language, you now have to roll your own.
Following the existing standard gets you features like URI parameters for free.
stellar:[email protected]?amount=42¤cy=USD
Just like a mailto URI, when clicked could take you to your favorite stellar wallet client (web or desktop) and fill in the send form.
Interesting note: Out of the ~30 official IANA registered URI schemes that specify using the @ symbol, only 3 are related to email addresses.