On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, Alexey Melnikov wrote: > > We can't standardize Junk and NotJunk; they are in the wrong namespace. > As $ convention was never documented, I don't see this as a problem. > If both clients use the keywords in the same way, Junk/NoJunk versa > $Junk/$NoJunk is just an aestheticchange.
It is more than esthetics. How do you know that "Junk" isn't my keyword to classified messages related to a particular type of boat found in Asia? Or that it doesn't classify my "junk" (as in an affectionate term for miscellaneous messages that I want to keep for various reasons, e.g. jokes, etc.) as opposed to spam. They are indeed in the wrong namespace. > Besides, AOL IMAP server supports Junk/NoJunk and doesn't support storing of > arbitrary keywords. I would not consider AOL to be a shining example of standardization; nor of a model to follow, especially having installed AOL DSL for a relative (his insistance) and seeing for myself how AOL spits on standards and interoperability. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum.
