- From: Matthew Smith <matt@kbc.net.au>
- Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 10:48:50 +1030
- To: WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I wrote: <blockquote> >> I would be interested in any views on "munging" (disguising) e-mail >> addresses on web sites to prevent their being harvested by spammers >> (senders of unsolicited bulk e-mail). </blockquote> Lynn Alford replied: <blockquote> > What I have on my site is in a style sheet > > .noshow { display: none;} > > And on the page is > > Send mail <a > href="mailto:lynn.alford@deletethis.gmail.com">lynn.alford@<span > class="noshow">deletethis.</span>gmail.com</a>. </blockquote> Thanks for the suggestion Lynn. The only problem that I can see with this technique is that it will present the "munged" address to user agents that do not process style sheets. Whilst this includes harvester user agents, to which we want to present "munged" data, it will also present the corrupted form to user agents such as Lynx and indeed any agent that has CSS turned off or that substitutes its own styling. This issue has me banging my head against the wall (speaking metaphorically - at the moment); whatever technique we use to obscure the data from those we don't want to read it, we always seem to do so for some that we do. David W's point about what I'd term "intelligent substitution" causing problems for those with learning difficulties was a concern already on my mind. Humans can fail a Turing Test just as well as machines. A knotty problem indeed. Cheers M -- Matthew Smith Kadina Business Consultancy South Australia http://www.kbc.net.au
Received on Monday, 14 February 2005 00:18:57 UTC