Re: WGLC on draft-ietf-sieve-spamtestbis-03.txt

["Mark E. Mallett" <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 04:17:19PM +0100, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> 
> As there were some significant changes to the document, I would like to 
> do another (1 week) WG Last Call on the document.
> Please send you comments to the mailing list and/or directly to me 
> before June 22nd 2006.

It looks good to me.

One mild thought: with the new :count thing, though, wouldn't that be the
preferred way of seeing if the test were done?  e.g. in 3.2.2:

   To determine whether the message was tested for spam or not, the
   preferred solution is to use the test without the ":percent"
   argument, testing for the normalized result value "0" as described in
   Section 3.2.1.

and a few other places and examples.


Also in 3.3, I think the second test in the example would read nicer
if it were an 'elsif' and not a plain 'if':

           if virustest :value "eq" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric" "0"
           {
               fileinto "INBOX.unclassified";
           }
 -->       if virustest :value "eq" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric" "4"
           {
               fileinto "INBOX.quarantine";
           }

not that it would cause different results, but it just strikes me as
more "pure" that way.  (picky, eh)

mm