Re: [apps-discuss] Call for Adoption: draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap

["John R Levine" <[e-mail]>]

>> (1) The message was classified as spam and the user has not said anything.
>> (2) The message was classified as spam but the user says it isn't.
>> (3) The message was not classified as spam and the user has not said
>>         anything.
>> (4) The message was not classified as spam but the user says it is.
>> 
>> You cannot represent all of those in a single bit.
>
> Correct, and I think we should /not/ try to represent all those cases.

I suppose this could be two bits, one the spam state to display, the other 
a less visible flag the user can toggle, but that's not what IMAP does 
with its other flags.

In all of the webmails I can think of, a message has a displayed spam state, 
either with a visible flag or implicitly because it's in the spam folder. 
When you hit the junk/nojunk button, the state changes immediately.  The 
server can certainly remember internally whether the state was generated 
automatically or set by the user, but no webmail I know displays that, so 
I don't see any need to build it into IMAP.

Regards,
John Levine, [e-mail], Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
"I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly.