[SURBL-Discuss] RFC: pj.surbl.org - list from Joe Wein and Pr olocation data

Jeff Chan jeffc at surbl.org
Sun Sep 19 20:48:13 CEST 2004

On Sunday, September 19, 2004, 10:29:49 AM, Frank Ellermann wrote:
> Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:

>> Its smaller, catches more then the combined list, and has
>> a lower FP rating then the combined list.

> Sounds very good.  Technically only the lower FP rate is a
> convincing argument for an independent MULTI bit / set, and
> there are only 7 MULTI bits / sets.

> If some users would want to use JP but not WS, then they'd
> need a separate bit.  Somebody said that the lists overlap,
> therefore enumerations (0 null, 1 WS, 2 PJ, 3 third list)
> won't work to identify the source, and it has to be 0 null,
> 1 WS, 2 PJ, 3 WS+PJ (shifted to 2 corresponding MULTI bits).

>                      Bye, Frank

Well we would not shift the bits around.  If we had separate
bits for WS, JP, and WS+JP, the original WS+JP would be in the
same place and the other two (separate lists) would get new bits.

But me might also lean towards taking JP out of WS if we do this
(i.e., no WS+JP).

Jeff C.

More information about the Discuss mailing list