I found out if I use canonical, depending on the user, the output is sometimes like:
Joe Doe/USER/ACMEINC@Americas
In this instance, the readers field does not work. I.e. Joe is unable to see the document.
If I use [CN], then he can see it.
Why is this so?
JJ
Subject: Author field - “@” problem
JJ,
Joe Doe/USER/ACMEINC@Americas is not a name. It may be an email address, but it’s not what you’d find in someone’s user id file as their name. Their name is perhaps Joe Doe/USR/ACMEINC, and if you wrote that out canonically as CN=Joe Doe/OU=USER/O=ACMEINC then you’d have success.
Or you can use the flat name, Joe Doe, as long as this is strictly a single domain and you aren’t worried about future mergers with other domains/hierarchies.
regards,
raphael
Subject: RE: Author field - “@” problem
I see.
I have a “name” field where user can select email names from the address book. The “name” field also doubles as a author field.
The user wants to see something user friendly but the functionality has to work. I am trying not to create duplicate fields like
1 CN field for display
1 Canonical for authors
Subject: RE: Author field - “@” problem
We have that effect when users choose the name from our condensed directory catalog (which includes different domains). It doesn’t do any harm in address fields …
Is it the case in your application?
Maybe you could teach your users NOT to use the catalogue - or place an translation formula into that field like
@Left(@ThisValue;“@”)
HTH - Uwe