>> >DA Morgan wrote:
>> >
>> > BTW: It is possible for two different people to have the same email
>> > address: Just not at the same point-in-time. So an email address is NOT
People can share an E-mail address. I do not see it often, but I
do see it.
>> > suitable except in a specifically constrained environment.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>and the system is programmed to never give out an address more than once,
>and no one will ever change any of this.
Fine. Fine. Fine. "Now that Smith, Sr. has retired, Smith,
Jr., our new company president, wants his father's old E-mail address
as his."
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Christopher Browne - 24 Jan 2005 23:25 GMT
After takin a swig o' Arrakan spice grog, Gene Wirchenko <genew@ucantrade.com.NOTHERE> belched out:
>>> >DA Morgan wrote:
>>> >
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> Jr., our new company president, wants his father's old E-mail address
> as his."
Hmm.
My organization has quite a number of "role-based" addresses which
would utterly destroy the notion of uniqueness here.
There's:
techsupport@foo.bar.info, for technical support
custsupport@foo.bar.info, for customer support
dba@foo.bar.info, to get at our DBAs
systems@foo.bar.info, to get at our sysadmins
There are cases where people working for vendors try to email us
individually, which has a tendancy to _break_ because that means that
if I go on vacation, those things the vendors were contacting me about
wind up staying broken until they can get a hold of someone else.
They should instead have sent the message to the "dba" alias.
Things directed to me generally go to "cbbrowne@foo.bar.info"; if I
cared, I could set up "chris" as an alias for "cbbrowne" because I am,
so far, the only Chris around the office.
This means that email address makes a really crummy attempt at a
primary key, and that we've got pretty complex Exim configuration
files :-).

Signature
let name="cbbrowne" and tld="gmail.com" in String.concat "@" [name;tld];;
http://cbbrowne.com/info/wp.html
"People are more vocally opposed to fur than leather because it's
easier to harass rich women than motorcycle gangs." [bumper sticker]
Alan - 24 Jan 2005 23:42 GMT
> >> >DA Morgan wrote:
> >> >
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>
> Gene Wirchenko
I never said it was a good idea. The OP wanted an example. In your example
(Smith), it _might_ be okay to do what Jr wants- so long as he understands
that any historical information will not be accurate. Sometimes that is
okay. We have a system (at work, and NOT designed by me) that uses email
addresses for logons. In this particular case, the user population is known,
finitie, and historical logon information is not needed. The email/user id
is linked to an internal (business-related) number that is associated to the
user's business. In effect, his logon id is a pseudonym for his _real_ id.
If this user drops out of our company, we don't care if his email address is
used by someone else because the business-related number will be different.
We just don't have any history of who had that email ID before, but we also
don't need it for anything (so far!). Again- not my idea, and not how I
would have done it, but it does work- in our case- so far...<waiting for
other shoe to drop>