In <200609192056(_dot_)20929(_dot_)julian(_at_)mehnle(_dot_)net> Julian Mehnle
<julian(_at_)mehnle(_dot_)net> writes:
Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006, Julian Mehnle wrote:
* rename include: to something like if-pass. It is *really* badly
named right now and causes a lot of confusion.
Why not just name it "if:" (less confusing) and provide "include:" as
a deprecated (confusing but backwards compatible) alternative?
Because "if-fail:" would also be quite useful.
But you could always say "-if:".
No, assuming you are saying that "-if:" is the same as "-include:xxx",
that means "if the evaluation of xxx is PASS, then return FAIL".
So, I think "if" would be just as bad, if not worse, than "include".
Or do we really need a full-blown "if" control statement? (No way!)
I've suggested an "if-<result>:" form before, back when I was
complaining that "include:" was horribly named. I'm not sure that it
would really be that useful though. The two cases that people seem to
want is the "if-pass" case, and the "if eval(xxx) returns a result,
then return that result". The latter is somewhat what redirect= does,
but it doesn't allow you to do things like this:
v=spf1 a call:isp.com -all exp=_spfexp.%{d}"
Where, isp.com gives a default result of ?all and we want to make a
stronger statement. Also, with redirect=, we can't use our own exp=
text.
config.com text "v=spf1 include:216.28.158.0/24 include:67.15.56.0/24
include:67.15.57.0/24 include:www.2.sitegalore.com
include:66.219.135.0/24" " -all"
Seriously, I refuse to take people into account who don't read the fine
manual. It's really not that hard to understand.
If you need to read the directions, it is too complicated. I'm
somewhat serious here. Having something with "sharp edges" and saying
people should just learn to avoid those edges is just bad design. I
highly recommend reading "The Design of Everyday Things". It has
nothing directly to do with computers, but it gives great insight into
how you should design things to make them useful/popular/effective.
-wayne
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com