Subject: Priority - string or value ?

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 19:03:47 +0530

Hi the priority grammar has been defined in RFC-2543 as:

        Priority        =  "Priority" ":" priority-value
        priority-value  =  "emergency" | "urgent" | "normal"
                        |  "non-urgent"

Isnt it more helpful if a integral number is also added as a part of
priority value ?
This would allow a larger scalability of priorities. Implementation point
of view, a numeric priority value would be easier to categorise/extend too.
For example the grammar might say
priority-value = 1 | 2| 3| 4 where 1 means "emergency etc"
so I can go ahead and add a 5 if I want to (which may well be understood by
only my implementation and in future may be understood by others as they
standardise)

Just a thought.
Regds
Arjun

---

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 18:01:08 -0400

These basic classifications have sufficed for email. They're nice in
that its easy for a human being to select a value, since the meaning is
clear. I would be inclined not to change these unless there is a
demonstrable need.

-Jonathan R.

-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg                       Lucent Technologies
Member of Technical Staff                   101 Crawfords Corner Rd.
High Speed Networks Research                Holmdel, NJ 07733
FAX: (732) 834-5379                         Rm. 4C-526
EMAIL: [email-masked]
URL: http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~jdrosen