On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Conrad Irwin <conrad.irwin(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
Out of interest, do you know what percentage of emails
in the database
don't validate under the new scheme?
That's actually a wise thing to check -- most fails will probably be
legitimately bogus entries, but if we can find any that don't validate but
*do* work (eg they've been confirmed as functional) that's info we need to
report upstream as well -- the new code is using the specs for HTML 5's
client-side form validation, which is starting to go into the latest
generation of browsers.
In theory the validation rules should be pretty liberal, and you should need
to do something very esoteric to not pass. (The old validation regexes from
~2004-2005 got kicked out for failing to deal with things like '+' which
turned out to be more common than we thought.)
Folks actually already pushed a fix upstream to the whatwg spec page to
allow single-part domains like 'localhost', needed for local-network testing
and perhaps some weird intranet setups.
-- brion