Re: [Asrg] Adding a spam button to MUAs

Franck Martin <franck@avonsys.com> Thu, 17 December 2009 20:18 UTC

Return-Path: <franck@avonsys.com>
X-Original-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A321B3A68C1 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:18:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.914
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.914 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.040, BAYES_05=-1.11, SUBJECT_FUZZY_TION=0.156]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2hBOre3R0JaC for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:18:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from seine.avonsys.com (seine.avonsys.com [113.20.89.106]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 041DE3A6842 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:18:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by seine.avonsys.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C382F64F8131 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:18:10 +1300 (FJST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at avonsys.com
Received: from seine.avonsys.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (seine.avonsys.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N6oeFzn4zwYy for <asrg@irtf.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:18:09 +1300 (FJST)
Received: from seine.avonsys.com (seine [192.168.69.129]) by seine.avonsys.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5202564F8130 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:18:09 +1300 (FJST)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 08:18:09 +1200 (FJT)
From: Franck Martin <franck@avonsys.com>
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
Message-ID: <266313159.161261081085132.JavaMail.franck@franck-martins-macbook-pro.local>
In-Reply-To: <1860A957448C14F9FF0901DB@lewes.staff.uscs.susx.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [192.168.69.112]
X-Mailer: Zimbra 6.0.1_GA_1816.UBUNTU6 (Yahoo! Zimbra Desktop/1.0.3_1696_Mac)
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Adding a spam button to MUAs
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:18:37 -0000

Ian,

My feeling is that this is a feature badly needed now for IMAP. How to implement it? Seems your solution reasonable.

I'm just dealing with a case of different clients storing sent messages in different "Sent" folders. People use different clients because sometimes they use a web interface and sometimes some piece of software.


Franck Martin 
http://www.avonsys.com/ 
http://www.facebook.com/Avonsys 
twitter: FranckMartin Avonsys 


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Eiloart" <iane@sussex.ac.uk>
To: "Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF" <asrg@irtf.org>
Sent: Friday, 18 December, 2009 5:24:18 AM GMT +12:00 New Zealand
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Adding a spam button to MUAs



--On 17 December 2009 07:34:49 +1200 Franck Martin <franck@avonsys.com> 
wrote:

>
> PS: there is no convention either on the location of the sent folder,
> draft folder, contact, calendar, etc... Which obliges the user serious
> fine tuning when using different clients. This capability could indicate
> basic folders to the client for automatic set-up.
>

There isn't even a convention that you should have different mailboxes for 
any purpose. Gmail broke that, when they decided that tags (mathematically 
"sets") were more useful than mailboxes (mathematically "categories"). 
Mailboxes are logically equivalent to restricting emails to carrying a 
single tag.

As I said earlier in the thread, registration of some new IMAP flags is 
probably a better way to do this. The NAME of a mailbox is language 
dependent, so it should not be standardised. The NAME of a flag need not be 
presented to a user, so it can be standardised. It would also allow richer 
semantics, and on a per-message basis.

Of course, the presentation to the user could be as if the messages were 
all filed in a separate mailbox.

-- 
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@irtf.org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg