On 12/15, Martin Gregorie wrote: > In that case I'm missing some information: how to write a rule that can > interpret the value(s) returned by TextCat.
I think you're looking for: ok_languages en fr de - http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.3.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Plugin_TextCat.html > Why wouldn't it be sensible to rewrite ok_locales to compare TextCat > return value(s) against its list of OK codes? Because that functionality already exists within TextCat? > Then why has ok_locales not been fixed already? This is not a criticism, > just a request for information. Is it something that's difficult to do > efficiently? I'd imagine that language recognition by looking codepoint > values is possible but not necessarily fast nor unambiguous. Because it's not actually broken. That bug should probably be closed. Perhaps after noting the limited utility in the documentation. ok_locales functions by identifying character sets that can only be used for a specific language. UTF8, Windows-1255, and koi8 are not such character sets, because they can also be used to write in English. And, most importantly, as Kevin says here, people *do* use those character sets to write in English: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4078#c27 Well, it's obvious that people write English in UTF8. > I've no time ATM and in any case I'm a middling to poor Perl coder. Now, > if SA was written in C or Java.... I bet you know that's the best way to get better at a language. -- "If you are not paranoid... you may not be paying attention." - j...@creative-net.net, on an IDPA mailing list http://www.ChaosReigns.com
