On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 08:11:19PM -0400, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
Hi,
Well, I'm not sure we should 'bless' one way over the other. So how about
replacing the above paragraph with:
---
To determine whether the message was tested for spam or not, two options
can be used:
a) a test with or without the ":percent" argument and ":count" match
type,
testing for the value "0" as described in Section 3.1.
b) a test without the ":percent" argument using the ":value" match type,
testing for the normalized result value "0" as described in
Section 3.2.1.
---
That's fine with me- I'd probably prefer :count for its simplicity but
if we don't want to bless one or another, I won't squawk ..
BTW the description of the various "has not been tested" results means
that the implementation is required to be able to determine if a spam
test has been done. I suppose it could also mean "could not determine
if the test has been done." (which is mostly the same for script
purposes, but it is subtley different..)
mm