Christian Roth said: >Why wouldn't this work with the current search technology? What is the >vital limitation? The limitations of CTM Foxtrot(TM) are such that certain criteria, that is not part of the search index, are impossible to find. That includes pretty much everything that is not considered by Foxtrot(TM) to be a "word". Exactly what a "word" means in this context I leave aside.
What this would mean, if the Foxtrot(TM) technology was the base for the envisioned 'smart folders', is that some messages, that can reliably be sorted with filter technology, would be *impossible* to have included into these 'smart' folders. So, you may suggest "just use the filter technology instead". While this would be possible, it would also likely mean PowerMail would consume more CPU power, as I suspect that filter technology is much more expensive on the percentage of CPU used. This is indeed speculation on my side though. I can see we are possibly talking about two kinds of 'smart' folders here. One being based on, or even merged with, Filter technology or similar, but applied to "virtual" folders and only active in relation to a connection. The other being based on Search technology (Foxtrot(TM)), more or less merged with the search functions Search Results windows and being active both in relation to a connection and to user input. As you can see, there is more to 'smart' folders than putting the Recent Mail window in the browser. I say it again, even if the above hopefully makes it clear, that 'smart' folder isn't a fixed thing. It can be many different things with different implications needing different GUI solutions. It would help the discussion if we focused a bit on problem formulation. I'm still thinking about the problem space and trying to understand the somewhat obscure suggestions that have been made. To be continued.... PM 5.2.3 Swedish | OS X 10.3.9 | Powerbook G4/400Mhz | 1GB RAM | 30GB HD
