I've tried to figure out whether the format of an e-mail address can be said to comply with the definition of a URI or not, but I've found no explicit confirmation of this so far. I hope someone can provide me with some insight here. Thanks in advance :)
6 Answers
Yes, but with "mailto:" prefix.
A URI has this form:
<scheme>:<scheme-specific-part>
The <scheme>
is "mailto", the <scheme-specific-part>
is the address.
For example:
mailto:max@provider.com
is a valid URI.

- 174,988
- 54
- 320
- 367

- 5,185
- 3
- 27
- 36
-
1So, without the `mailto:` scheme, an email address cannot be considered a URI? – SarahofGaia Apr 29 '16 at 17:37
Per RFC 3986:
A Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) is a compact sequence of characters that identifies an abstract or physical resource.
The basic syntax components as defined by the RFC:
The generic URI syntax consists of a hierarchical sequence of
components referred to as the scheme, authority, path, query, and
fragment.
URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]
hier-part = "//" authority path-abempty
/ path-absolute
/ path-rootless
/ path-empty
So - an e-mail address is not a URI. However mailto:you@server.com
is a valid URI.

- 161,610
- 92
- 305
- 395
An e-mail address on it's own - foo@bar.com - I'd say no. A link to an e-mail address - mailto:foo@bar.com - I'd say yes.

- 666
- 4
- 4
-
A URI doesn't need to include the scheme part (`mailto`) to be valid. – McDowell Feb 02 '10 at 14:42
-
@Massimo Fazzolari - yes, you are correct - I was mistaken - the ABNF for RFC 3986 requires a scheme. – McDowell Feb 02 '10 at 14:59
yes when used with "mailto" scheme, look here: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt
1.3. Example URI
The following examples illustrate URI that are in common use.
mailto:mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch
-- mailto scheme for electronic mail addresses

- 1,609
- 1
- 13
- 24
-
-
but only with the "mailto" qualifier. Think of it this way, HREF's takes URIs. – Stephen Wrighton Feb 02 '10 at 14:40
-
@Stephen Wrighton - a URI doesn't need to include the scheme part (`mailto`) to be valid. – McDowell Feb 02 '10 at 14:44
-
-
@Andrew Aylett - yes, you are correct - I was mistaken - the ABNF clearly requires a scheme. – McDowell Feb 02 '10 at 14:57
If all URL's are URI's then all soandso@somwhere.com address are URIs because they are URLs
So I think an email address is a URI, if it has mailto: in front of it.
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2368 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1738

- 1
- 1

- 32,326
- 33
- 105
- 164
I think it is, if it includes the "mailto:" schema reference in the address; otherwise not. But as it is only seen at html pages, in the most of cases the email address it self could not be considered a URI.
If you haven't checked before, take a look at RFC3305 document.
The official register of URI scheme names is maintained by IANA at http://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes.html
I hope it helps, Carlos.

- 4,675
- 3
- 38
- 44