Revision 9058fe6e7cd1f26b40f3f0e298214bc75b1e576d

[Nathan Walp]

Stu Tomlinson wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 15:54 -0400, Nathan Walp wrote:
>> Sean Egan wrote:
>>> On 6/1/07, Mark Doliner <mark at kingant.net> wrote:
>>>> Why wouldn't we want to linkify join and part messages?
>>> Presumingly, to prevent:
>>>
>>> Darien [n=darien at 69.90.0.29] entered the room.
>>>
>>
>> Actually, it's to prevent Clint at Work [someone at gmail.com] entered the 
>> room.  (the linkify code already ignores stuff inside of HTML tags, and 
>> the address part of the join messages is inside of <i></i>)
> 
> Umm, linkify does not ignore things in <i></i>, but it does not linkify
> invalid email addresses (which a full JID is)
> 
> For "Clint at Work" we should probably make purple_email_is_valid() reject
> addresses with just a single domain part.
> 
> Right now, this:
> 
> (19:40:30) user left the room (Download this: http://pidgin.im/).
> 
> won't be linked and we'll have far fewer people downloading pidgin...
> oh, but only if they already have pidgin... hmm. Maybe I'm onto a losing
> argument here.
> 
> How about we a) only disable linkifying for join messages, and b) fix
> purple_email_is_valid to require multiple domain parts?
> 

Only disabling them in join means that "Foo at Bar left the room" still 
gets linkified.

And a domain with only 1 part still makes a perfectly valid email address.

Maybe we need the ability to tag parts of a message as not needing 
linkification, so we could send "<span linkify="false">Clint at Work 
[<i>someone at gmail.com</i>]</span>" or something, and in the part 
messages, could put "<span linkify="false">Clint at Work left the 
room</span> (Download this: http://pidgin.im/)"

-Nathan