[Top] [All Lists]

Re: values of notify ":priority" tag

2005-12-05 06:51:49

It feels like what was discussed in these threads has been forgotten:


"This makes it sound like there are hard and fast rules between user status 
notifications and the setting of the priority parameter, yet the discussion is 
very brief and doesn't elaborate to rigorously define all those rules.  I also 
feel uneasy about adding syntax that permits only 3 levels of priority.   I 
think we should either drop the parameter, or extend it to allow an almost 
arbitrary number and style of priority statuses, even if we only define 3 for 
now.  I'm thinking of the Priority/X-Priority/X-MSMail-Priority mess in mail 
headers.  I'd suggest a string which could be used with the relational draft to 
do numeric comparisons if desired."

However I don't recall us reaching any conclusions, as the discussion wandered 
towards the subject of passing parameters to the notification mechanism.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alexey Melnikov" <alexey(_dot_)melnikov(_at_)isode(_dot_)com>
To: <ietf-mta-filters(_at_)imc(_dot_)org>
Cc: "Peter Saint-Andre" <stpeter(_at_)jabber(_dot_)org>
Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: values of notify ":priority" tag

Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

In draft-ietf-sieve-notify-01 the possible values of the ":priority" 
tag are "1", "2", and "3". There is a note about perhaps retaining 
"high", "normal", and "low" instead. I wonder why we're not using 
"urgent", "normal", and "non-urgent" as specified in RFC 1327 and 
re-used in RFC 2076 and RFC 3261 (the latter also adds "emergency" but 
I don't think we'd need that for email notifications).

Another question related to this: do we want to have 3 levels or 5 (like 
in X-Priority header)?