| Title |
Test
Find
RFC2822 Compliant Email Check
|
| Expression |
^(([-\w$%&'*+\/=?^_`{|}~.]+)@(([-a-zA-Z0-9_]+\.)*)([-a-zA-Z0-9]+\.)([a-zA-Z0-9]{2,7}))?$ |
| Description |
RFC2822 compliant email matching regex that doesn't assume TLDs are set for all time. Clearly this means that someone could get a 2 letter country code wrong, but since no TLD is set in stone, I prefer to match future possibilities as well. This also conforms to what traditional DNS can do w/r/t hostnames and domain names. |
| Matches |
|
| Non-Matches |
aoluser1 |
| Author |
Rating:
David Kearns
|
| Source |
|
| Your Rating |
|
Title: Example - followup
Name: Gary
Date: 6/7/2007 5:04:25 AM
Comment:
Just saw the test button. I made a mistake with [email protected] it doesn't match but [email protected] would match, again maybe this is a valid address?? Finally, like I thought entering nothing matches as well so the {1} is needed. Cheers, Gary
Title: Example
Name: Gary
Date: 6/7/2007 4:56:23 AM
Comment:
I haven't read the RFC in question but I think your expression would match the following:
[email protected]
[email protected]
are these valid e-mail addresses? Maybe they are, like I said I am not sure.
Also the ? in your expression ^( some pattern )?$ matches zero or 1 times. I think you should change the ? to a {1}
Regards,
Gary.
Title: Examples, please
Name: David Kearns
Date: 5/8/2007 4:45:15 PM
Comment:
And how does this not conform to the RFC in question? Criticism like this is rather unhelpful, you don't provide a proper solution or even provide examples of how this is wrong.
Title: WRONG WRONG WRONG
Name: Randal L. Schwartz
Date: 4/27/2007 9:46:10 AM
Comment:
Once again, you even cite the right RFC, but you are NOT implementing the RFC.
WHY IS MATCHING EMAIL SO HARD FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND?
{sigh}
