At 01:03 PM 11/28/95 EST, Carl Ellison wrote:
That's true. What the user would have to see is some icon (or, for text-bound folks, a temporary unique string) until the user chooses and assigns the appropriate alias. That icon would have no meaning by itself. It would acquire a meaning by being associated with some message or set of messages:
James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com>
Better method: Creator of the key names it
At 10:55 AM 11/29/95 EST, Carl Ellison wrote:
it might also be non-unique, making it worthless as an identifier.
Then your database should detect this non uniqueness, and qualify the displayed name with additional information, preferably additional information that helps you address the question of "Is this the same identity who has changed his key, or is it an accidental collision, or is it a malevolent spoof?" --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd@echeque.com