WEB-49Non alphanumeric username
There is a player named ü. The uuid is c6893ba47cfd4002abea33d4b1bd3f7a.
This is a legacy account that must have been created before usernames had proper restrictions.
It is possible to look this user up by uuid, but looking up by name (both u and ü) returns nothing.
Can you rename the account to u (and potentially other accounts with non alphanumeric chars) so it works properly with the API?
Also, are there accounts with usernames longer than 16 chars?
NormalCreated Issue:
Non alphanumeric username
There is a player named ü. The uuid is c6893ba47cfd4002abea33d4b1bd3f7a.
This is a legacy account that must have been created before usernames had proper restrictions.
It is possible to look this user up by uuid, but looking up by name (both u and ü) returns nothing.
Can you rename the account to u (and potentially other accounts with non alphanumeric chars) so it works properly with the API?
Also, are there accounts with usernames longer than 16 chars?
![[Mojang] Nathan Adams](../../../data/assets/gravatar/dinnerbone.png){kind=small}
![[Mojang] Web Team](../../../data/avatars/users/10122.svg){kind=small}
[Mojang] Web Team
relates to
relates to
https://api.mojang.com/users/profiles/minecraft/u returns 204 No Content, but according to https://sessionserver.mojang.com/session/minecraft/profile/c6893ba47cfd4002abea33d4b1bd3f7a that user still exists.
The same applies to user Z (ca58c68cf220499b944926cb4f25c2c6), and perhaps more users, see comments.
I am aware that the current limitation for NEW usernames is 3-16 characters, but old accounts don't have this limit. See for example https://api.mojang.com/users/profiles/minecraft/G or https://api.mojang.com/users/profiles/minecraft/ez.
This is likely related to WEB-49.
i found the name was updated to ü soooo WTF
@Wulf715 nope, that's only what happens when you try to view an UTF-8 encoded "ü" (0xC3BC) in ISO-8859 (which nobody should be using in 2015 anymore).
There's also users with names such as "G".
I don't think this is an issue, since that account has been revoked, so it's not technically valid.
@DevDylan that's a valid account with an alphanumeric character. Nothing wrong with it.
deleted I was simply pointing out that old usernames, such as "G", were not removed or filtered after creation. "G" has too few characters to be a valid username with the modern system.
same with ez
It wouldn't make sense to delete old accounts only because new rules disallow short usernames.
Thanks for fixing @KrisJelbring. Just wondering, did you make sure there are no similar accounts remaining?
@jomo u with two dots was never allowed. Also, these accounts haven't been used since before 2012
Obviously ü was allowed some time ago, otherwise it wouldn't exist. It doesn't matter whether they're used or not, it matters that they break things.