On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 10:59:07AM -0500, Mark E. Mallett wrote:
On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 03:17:55PM +0000, Dave Cridland wrote:
This in turn makes me wonder whether we actually need an intermediate
service which dispatches the notifications at some point in the
future, which can be told how best to contact us, depending on the
importance of us reacting to that notification.
That's certainly what I had assumed- especially when people were talking
about things like the need to rate-limit notifications, or to be aware
about the recipients state WRT to reception of notifications or
priorities. It would be natural to build that kind of logic into a
seperate notification utility, not into a Sieve engine.
Making the priority value some opaque string makes sense to me too,
or even pushing it off to one of the :attributes tag=value list
elements that Michael Haardt was talking about.
Note I just changed my mind and now support keeping ":priority"
(Barry suggested to rename it to ":importance") in the generic
framework.
After thinking about it, I remembered to have wished for some time my
MUA knew something about importance of messages, like news readers often
offer as "scoring", although they use just a single number for that.
I miss a common approach to _values_ of importance, but now think it
is an important attribute that should be offered to implement by
all methods, thus it makes sense to have it as option in the framework.
Much like ":from".
Michael