jm at jmason.org
Wed Apr 23 10:13:18 PDT 2003
Jeff Bone said:
> On Tuesday, Apr 22, 2003, at 08:05 US/Central, Russell Turpin wrote:
> > Jeff Bone:
> >> I think you missed the point. Go re-read Paul's write up: it's a
> >> substantial change from "fire-and-forget" to "notify me that I need
> >> to come get something." .. Plus, it's a lot easier to filter / avoid
> >> bogus structured metadata content in the notification .. than it is
> >> to try to semantically classify the content itself, by which time
> >> I've already received and stored it.
> > I'm not too excited about this. (1)
> Okay, look --- the primary intent of RESTmail is not in fact to fight
> spam. (In fact it was entirely pedantic; much work needed to make it
> viable.) There are lots of other reasons that one might want to go
> from a "push it all, store-and-forward, routed" mechanism to "sender
> pushes the headers, receiver pulls the body" mechanism --- and still
> other reasons why having the underlying protocol be HTTP and each
> message have a URI would be a good thing.
Actually, JB has a point. There's been a few similar proposals, using
protocols like RSS to do "legit bulk mail", given legit bulk mailers'
current problems with spamfilters. It makes a lot of sense, especially
since subscribers no longer *have* to subscribe and unsubscribe -- they
control whether or not a poll happens on *their* desktop anyway.
But quite a few of them *like* email, and couldn't even be bothered
setting up basic anti-spam "bonus points" measures like rDNS on their mail
servers -- so the chances of them setting up RSS (or whatever) are slim.
More information about the FoRK