1) I think a standard filter language is a Good Thing, exactly because
the Right Place for the filtering is at delivery time, not reading time,
and since all the rest of the UI/mailbox interface is standardized
(IMAP, ACAP), the filtering language needs to be too.
The alternative is that filters stay in the UI, and people have to wait
minutes before reading their E-mail, not to mention the need to
download everything for filtering before classifying most of it as
"not worth reading now". BAD.
2) I will balk VERY strongly at having the letters MTA anywhere near
the mailing list name (sorry!), the WG name or the charter text.
The reason is that I believe the requirements for filtering at the UA
and filtering in the message path to be VERY different; the UA must
make a file/reply/drop/mark/call-attention decision; the MTA must
make a relay/bounce/black-hole decision.
These are differing requirements, I think aiming at both is likely to
produce something that satisfies neither.
I suggest calling it Mailbox Server Filtering Language - MSFL?
3) I will not object very strongly to an effort AFTER the UAFILTER effort
to use the if-condition language for UA filtering to see if this can be
applied to MTA filtering; as Keith said, it's doubtful that this will be
anything but a short-term, somewhat-ineffective measure.
who just spent about 3 days to get proper filter configurations into
Eudora, and is dreading the thought of moving mailbox yet again....
NOTE: New Email address: Harald(_dot_)Alvestrand(_at_)maxware(_dot_)no
I am working for Maxware (www.maxware.no) as of Dec 1, 1997