[spambayes-dev] RE: [Spambayes] Re: Training empty messages problem

[Kenny Pitt]

Tony Meyer wrote:
> I also did organisation - however, this is another one of those
> unnamed (and seemingly undocumented) properties, so I'm not 100% that
> it's correct.  For one, I can't set an "organisation" value for my
> exchange account, only POP/IMAP accounts.  However, if I send myself
> mail, I get the organisation value from another account tacked on to
> the message, so it seems that's what it is.  Could you try this one
> out (if possible) and see what you get?      

I checked several of my messages with dump_props, and I can't find a
property id 0x1037001E in any of my Exchange messages (even those that
arrived from outside SMTP senders).  I sent myself a message from a POP3
account that had the Organization set and then did a dump_props.  The only
place in the properties that the organization name I set showed up at all
was in the PR_TRANSPORT_MESSAGE_HEADERS_A property.  (Just FYI, the e-mail
headers were defined by us crazy Americans <wink>, so the official header
name is spelled "Organization" with a z)

I also noticed a couple of small problems with the formatting of the e-mail
addresses.

From: KennyPitt at invalid (Kenny Pitt)

According to RFC 822, this is technically correct because the "(Kenny Pitt)"
part should be ignored as a comment.  I believe the more common format,
however, should be:

From: Kenny Pitt <KennyPitt at invalid>

Or even safer since we don't know what characters might appear in the
display name:

From: "Kenny Pitt" <KennyPitt at invalid>

For the To header, it just happened that I sent the message to two
recipients so that I could compare the Exchange results to the POP3 results.
The original content of the To field in Outlook was "kennypitt at hotpop.com;
Kenny Pitt".  Here is what I got out in my spam clues:

To: kennypitthotpop.comKennyPitt at invalid (kennypitt at hotpop.com; Kenny Pitt)

The correct format, I believe, would be:

To: kennypitt at hotpop.com; "Kenny Pitt" <KennyPitt at invalid>

Should be a simple matter of splitting the addresses on the ";" character.
I'm going to go take a shot at this and see what I get.

-- 
Kenny Pitt