Tickets :: Comment on [#2617] Filtering on "Sender" does not use "From"

* Your Email Address
* Spam protection	Enter the letters below: . .. .. .. ..___ \|\ \|\|\ \|\|_/ \|_/ [__ \| \\|\| \\|\| \\| \[___
Comment	> Everything you say is true, but few users of web mail will understand > the difference between Sender and From, and will naturally think (as > I did) that "Sender" meant "the source of the message". I've been > sending and receiving email since '92 and I've never used the Sender > field on purpose. I didn't even know it was an official field until > I read the response to my bug report. > > > > The RFC gives the example of a secretary sending on behalf of a > manager, where the From contains the manager and the Sender contains > the secretary. It's certainly reasonable to think someone would want > to filter on this distinction, but it's not reasonable to expect > every Ingo user to understand the distinction, to remember the > correct meaning, or to want to filter this way frequently. > > > > Worse still, Sender comes first in the drop-down of fields, and > Subject comes between it and From: > > > > To > > Sender > > Subject > > From > > > > So as a first measure I would propose putting From at the top of the > list. As a second measure I would propose adding clarifying text > after the field name: > > > > From (message author) > > Sender (not message author) > > To > > Subject > > > > Also, since the RFC recommends against specifying a Sender when it is > the same as the From, how about filtering on From when Sender is > absent instead of just failing without a heplful indication of why. > > > > Furthermore, the list of fields is hardly exhaustive (what if I want > to filter on Reply-To?), so how about having a checkbox to enable > infrequently-used fields like Sender and Reply-To, and when the box > is unchecked, just show the "normal" filtering fields, From, To, > Subject, Body, X-Spam*. > > > > I don't think a documentation patch would be any help since I would > have no idea where to look in the documentation for why my mail > didn't get filtered when I specifically told Ingo to move messages > around by what I thought was "who sent me this". > > > > In any case, this IS a bug in the sense that the program didn't do > what I expected. Just because it's behaving "correctly" doesn't mean > it's behaving "well". Hiding behind standards in the face of user > confusion strikes me as bordering on what Steven Covey refered to as > "Malicious Obedience".
Attachment
Watch this ticket

Saved Queries