At 15:03 22/02/2005, Markus Hofmann wrote:
Alex Rousskov wrote:
I did not see anybody digging in. At this point, I have to wonder if I
am the only person left interested in the "common rules language"
problem. Did we lose the momentum and interest on this topic? Does it
make sense to continue working on rules (regardless of Seive versus P
question)?
There were a few folks interested in the topic when the charter was
discussed and before various (mostly IETF-imposed) delays put the topic
on the backburner. Should we assume that those folks lost interest (due
to delays or any other reason)?
Folks - we need to know if anyone is still interested in this work.
Doesn't make sense to drag this along without anyone working on it and
without making real progress.
Could anyone interested in the rules language work please speak up, in
particular the ones who expressed interest in contributing to the work
when we re-charted (don't make me go back into the email archives to dig
out the names... :). If we don't hear back, I recommend we fold this activity.
Obviously deeply interested. But before that I need to understand if the
whole OPES/SMTP makes sense. I fully documented that I do not understand
anything to the use case draft. The filtering rules are a major part, but
they can be understood very differently at different location and for
different purposes.
BTW has somebody a working experience of AskSam and/or an inner knowledge
of their logic?
I am not familiar with fuzzy filtering either. Is there an IETF work to
know there?
Thank you.
jfc