Implemented base64 encoder based on CamelStreams. Should the

1999-07-13  Miguel de Icaza  <miguel@gnu.org>

	* camel/gmime-base64.c (gmime_encode_base64): Implemented base64
	encoder based on CamelStreams.  Should the encoder/decoder be a
	Stream itself?

	* camel/gmime-utils.c: include config.h here.
	* camel/url-util.c: ditto.
	* camel/gstring-util.c: ditto.
	* camel/gmime-content-field.c: ditto.
	* camel/camel-stream.c: ditto.
	* camel/camel-stream-fs.c: ditto.
	* camel/camel-store.c: ditto.
	* camel/camel-simple-data-wrapper.c: ditto.
	* camel/camel-session.c: ditto.
	* camel/camel-service.c: ditto.
	* camel/camel-mime-part.c: ditto.
	* camel/camel-mime-message.c: ditto.
	* camel/camel-log.c: ditto.
	* camel/camel-data-wrapper.c: ditto
	* camel/camel-folder.c: ditto.

	* camel/camel-stream.c (camel_stream_write): Moved api
	documentation to the places that they document.
	(camel_stream_class_init): Virtual classes do not need to have a
	default implementation.  So null them all.
	(camel_stream_write): Return value from write.
	(camel_stream_available): implement.
	(camel_stream_write_strings): documented.

	* devel-docs/query/virtual-folder-in-depth.sgml: Small
	reformatting

1999-06-28  bertrand  <Bertrand.Guiheneuf@inria.fr>

	* tests/test2.c (main): now use
	CamelDataWrapper::contruct_form_stream to test

svn path=/trunk/; revision=1024

1 files changed, 392 insertions, 380 deletions

diff --git a/devel-docs/query/virtual-folder-in-depth.sgml b/devel-docs/query/virtual-folder-in-depth.sgml
index fc85132673..e6ba7ecf18 100644
--- a/devel-docs/query/virtual-folder-in-depth.sgml
+++ b/devel-docs/query/virtual-folder-in-depth.sgml
@@ -3,393 +3,405 @@
 <!-- SGMLized by Bertrand <Bertrand.Guiheneuf@inria.fr> -->
 
 <article id="index">
- <artheader>
- <authorgroup>
-   <author>
-    <firstname>Giao</firstname>
-    <surname>Nguyen</surname>
-    </author>
-   </authorgroup>
- <title>An in-depth look at the virtual folder mechanism</title>
-  <abstract>
-  <para>
-  This document describes a different way of approaching mail
-  organization and how all things are possible in this brave new
-  world. This document does not describe physical storage issues nor
-  interface issues.
-  </para>
-  <para>
-  Historically mail has been organized into folders. These folders
-  usually mapped to a single storage medium. The relationship between
-  mail organization and storage medium was one to one. There was one
-  mail organization for every storage medium. This scheme had its
-  limitations.
-  </para>
-  <para>  
-  Efforts at categorizations are only meaningful at the instance that
-  one categorized. To find any piece of data, regardless of how well
-  it was categorized, required some amount of searching. Therefore, any
-  attempts to nullify searching is doomed to fail. It's time to embrace
-  searching as a way of life.
-  </para>
-  <para>  
-  These are the terms and their definitions. The example rules used are
-  based on the syntax for VM (http://www.wonderworks.com/vm/) by Kyle
-  Jones whose ideas form the basis for this. I'm only adding the
-  existence of summary files to aid in scaling. I currently use VM and
-  it's virtual-folder rules for my daily mail purposes. To date, my only 
-  complaints are speed (it has no caches) and for the unitiated, it's
-  not very user-friendly.
-  </para>
-  <para>  
-  Comments, questions, rants, etc. should be directed at Giao Nguyen
-  (grail@cafebabe.org) who will try to address issues in a timely
-  manner.
-  </para>
- </abstract>
-</artheader>
- <sect1 id="definitions">
-  <title>Definitions</title>
-  <sect2>
-   <title>Store</title> 
-   <para>
-   A location where mail can be found. This may be a file (Berkeley
-   mbox), directory (MH), IMAP server, POP3 server, Exchange server,
-   Lotus Notes server, a stack of Post-Its by your monitor fed through
-   some OCR system.
-   </para>
-  </sect2>
-  <sect2>
-   <title>Message</title> 
-   <para>  
-   An individual mail message.
-   </para>
-  </sect2>
-  <sect2>
-   <title>Vfolder</title> 
-   <para>  
-   A group of messages sharing some commonality. This is the result of a
-   query. The vfolder maybe contained in a store, but it is not necessary
-   that a store holds only one vfolder. There is always an implicit
-   vfolder rule which matches all messages. A store contains the vfolder
-   which is the result of the query (any). It's short for virtual folder
-   or maybe view folder. I dunno.
-   </para>
-  </sect2>
-  <sect2>
-   <title>Default-vfolder</title> 
-   <para>  
-   The vfolder defined by (any) applied to the store. This is not the
-   inbox. The inbox could easily be defined by a query. A default rule
-   for the inbox could be (new) but it doesn't have to be. Mine happens
-   to be (or (unread) (new)).
-   </para>
-  </sect2>
-  <sect2>
-   <title>Folder</title> 
-   <para>  
-   The classical mail folder approach: one message organization per
-   store.
-   </para>
-  </sect2>
-  <sect2>
-   <title>Query</title> 
-   <para>  
-   A search for messages. The result of this is a vfolder. There are two
-   kinds of queries: named queries and lambda queries. More on this
-   later.
-   </para>
-  </sect2>
-  <sect2>
-   <title>Summary file </title> 
-   <para>  
-   An external file that contains pointers to messages which are matches
-   for a named query. In addition to pointers, the summary file should
-   also contain signatures of the store for sanity checks. When the term
-   "index" is used as a verb, it means to build a summary file for a
-   given name-value pair.
-   </para>
-  </sect2>
- </sect1>
+  <artheader>
+    <authorgroup>
+      <author>
+	<firstname>Giao</firstname>
+	<surname>Nguyen</surname>
+      </author>
+    </authorgroup>
 
- <sect1>
-  <title>Queries</title> 
-  <para>  
-  Named queries are analogous to classical mail folders. Because named
-  queries maybe reused, summary files are kept as caches to reduce
-  the overall cost of viewing a vfolder. Summary files are superior to
-  folders in that they allow for the same messages to appear in multiple
-  vfolders without message duplications. Duplications of messages
-  defeats attempts at tagging a message with additional user information
-  like annotations. Named queries will define folders.
-  </para>
-  <para>
-  Lambda queries are similar to named queries except that they have no
-  name. These are created on the fly by the user to filter out or
-  include certain messages.
-  </para>
-  <para>
-  All queries can be layered on top of each other. A lambda query can be 
-  layered on a named query and a named query can be layered on a lambda
-  query. The possibilities are endless.
-  </para>
-  <para>
-  The layerings can be done as boolean operations (and, or, not). Short
-  circuiting should be used. 
-  </para>
-  <para>
-  Examples:
-  <programlisting>
-  (and (author "Giao")
-       (unread))
-  </programlisting>
-  The (unread) query should only be evaluated on the results of (author
-  "Giao").
-  <programlisting>
-  (or (author "Giao")
-      (unread))
-  </programlisting>
-  Both of these queries should be evaluated. Any matches are added to the
-  resulting vfolder.
-  </para>
- </sect1>
- 
- <sect1>
-  <title>Summary files</title> 
-  <para>    
-  Summary files are only meaningful when applied to the context of the
-  default-vfolder of a store.
-  </para>
-  <para>
-  Summary files should be generated for queries of the form:
-  <programlisting>
-  (function "constant value")
-  </programlisting>
-  Summary files should never be generated for queries of the form:
-  <programlisting>
-  (function (function1))
-  
-  (and (function "value")
-       (another-function "another value"))
-  </programlisting>
-  Given a query of the form:
-  <programlisting>
-  (and (function "value")
-       (another-function "another value"))
-  </programlisting>
-  The system should use one summary file for (function "value") and
-  another summary file for (another-function "another value"). I will
-  call the prior form the "plain form".
-  </para>
-  <para>
-  It should be noted that the signature of the store should be based on
-  the assumption that new data may have been added to the store since
-  the application generated the summary file. Signatures generated on
-  the entirety of the store will most likely be meaningless for things
-  like POP/IMAP servers. 
-  </para>
- </sect1>
+    <title>An in-depth look at the virtual folder mechanism</title>
+    <abstract>
+      <para>
+	This document describes a different way of approaching mail
+	organization and how all things are possible in this brave new
+	world. This document does not describe physical storage issues
+	nor interface issues.
+      </para>
+      <para>
+	Historically mail has been organized into folders. These
+	folders usually mapped to a single storage medium. The
+	relationship between mail organization and storage medium was
+	one to one. There was one mail organization for every storage
+	medium. This scheme had its limitations.
+      </para>
+      <para>  
+	Efforts at categorizations are only meaningful at the instance that
+	one categorized. To find any piece of data, regardless of how well
+	it was categorized, required some amount of searching. Therefore, any
+	attempts to nullify searching is doomed to fail. It's time to embrace
+	searching as a way of life.
+      </para>
+      <para>  
+	These are the terms and their definitions. The example rules used are
+	based on the syntax for VM (http://www.wonderworks.com/vm/) by Kyle
+	Jones whose ideas form the basis for this. I'm only adding the
+	existence of summary files to aid in scaling. I currently use VM and
+	it's virtual-folder rules for my daily mail purposes. To date, my only 
+	complaints are speed (it has no caches) and for the unitiated, it's
+	not very user-friendly.
+      </para>
+      <para>  
+	Comments, questions, rants, etc. should be directed at Giao Nguyen
+	(grail@cafebabe.org) who will try to address issues in a timely
+	manner.
+      </para>
+    </abstract>
+  </artheader>
 
- <sect1>
-  <title>Incremental indexing</title> 
-  <para>
-  When new messages are detected, all known queries should be evaluated
-  on the new messages. vfolders should be notified of new messages that
-  are positive matches for their queries. The indexes generated by this
-  process should be merged into the current indexes for the vfolder.
-  </para>
- </sect1>
+  <!-- Definitions -->
+  <sect1 id="definitions">
+    <title>Definitions</title>
+    <sect2>
+      <title>Store</title> 
+      <para>
+	A location where mail can be found. This may be a file (Berkeley
+	mbox), directory (MH), IMAP server, POP3 server, Exchange server,
+	Lotus Notes server, a stack of Post-Its by your monitor fed through
+	some OCR system.
+      </para>
+    </sect2>
 
- <sect1>
-  <title>Can I have multiple stores?</title> 
-  <para> 
-  I don't see why not. Again, the inbox is a vfolder so you can get a
-  unified inbox consisting of all new mail sent to all your stores or
-  your can get inboxes for each store or any combination your heart
-  desire. You get your cake, eat it, and someone else cleans the dishes!
-  </para>
- </sect1>
+    <sect2>
+      <title>Message</title> 
+      <para>  
+	An individual mail message.
+      </para>
+    </sect2>
+    <sect2>
+      <title>Vfolder</title> 
+      <para>  
+	A group of messages sharing some commonality. This is the result of a
+	query. The vfolder maybe contained in a store, but it is not necessary
+	that a store holds only one vfolder. There is always an implicit
+	vfolder rule which matches all messages. A store contains the vfolder
+	which is the result of the query (any). It's short for virtual folder
+	or maybe view folder. I dunno.
+      </para>
+    </sect2>
+    <sect2>
+      <title>Default-vfolder</title> 
+      <para>  
+	The vfolder defined by (any) applied to the store. This is not the
+	inbox. The inbox could easily be defined by a query. A default rule
+	for the inbox could be (new) but it doesn't have to be. Mine happens
+	to be (or (unread) (new)).
+      </para>
+    </sect2>
+    <sect2>
+      <title>Folder</title> 
+      <para>  
+	The classical mail folder approach: one message organization per
+	store.
+      </para>
+    </sect2>
+    <sect2>
+      <title>Query</title> 
+      <para>  
+	A search for messages. The result of this is a vfolder. There are two
+	kinds of queries: named queries and lambda queries. More on this
+	later.
+      </para>
+    </sect2>
+    <sect2>
+      <title>Summary file </title> 
+      <para>  
+	An external file that contains pointers to messages which are matches
+	for a named query. In addition to pointers, the summary file should
+	also contain signatures of the store for sanity checks. When the term
+	"index" is used as a verb, it means to build a summary file for a
+	given name-value pair.
+      </para>
+    </sect2>
+  </sect1>
 
- <sect1>
-  <title>Why all this?</title> 
-  <para> 
-  Consider the dynamic nature of the following query:
-  <programlisting>
-  (and (author "Giao")
-       (sent-after (today-midnight)))
-  </programlisting>
-  today-midnight would be a function that is evaluated at run-time to
-  calculate the appropriate object.
-  </para>
- </sect1>
+  <!-- Queries -->
+  <sect1>
+    <title>Queries</title> 
+    <para>  
+      Named queries are analogous to classical mail folders. Because named
+      queries maybe reused, summary files are kept as caches to reduce
+      the overall cost of viewing a vfolder. Summary files are superior to
+      folders in that they allow for the same messages to appear in multiple
+      vfolders without message duplications. Duplications of messages
+      defeats attempts at tagging a message with additional user information
+      like annotations. Named queries will define folders.
+    </para>
+    <para>
+      Lambda queries are similar to named queries except that they have no
+      name. These are created on the fly by the user to filter out or
+      include certain messages.
+    </para>
+    <para>
+      All queries can be layered on top of each other. A lambda query can be 
+      layered on a named query and a named query can be layered on a lambda
+      query. The possibilities are endless.
+    </para>
+    <para>
+      The layerings can be done as boolean operations (and, or, not). Short
+      circuiting should be used. 
+    </para>
+    <para>
+      Examples:
+      <programlisting>
+(and (author "Giao")
+  (unread))
+      </programlisting>
+      The (unread) query should only be evaluated on the results of (author
+      "Giao").
+      <programlisting>
+(or (author "Giao")
+  (unread))
+      </programlisting>
+      Both of these queries should be evaluated. Any matches are added to the
+      resulting vfolder.
+    </para>
+  </sect1>
 
- <sect1>
-  <title>Scenarios of usage and their solutions</title> 
-  <sect2>
-   <title>Mesage alterations</title>
-   <para>
-   This is a fuzzy area that should be left to the UI to handle. Messages 
-   are altered. Read status are altered when a new message is read for
-   example. How do we handle this if our query is for unread messages?
-   Upon viewing the state would change.
-   </para>
-   <para>
-   One idea is to not evaluate the queries unless we're changing between
-   vfolder views. This assumes that one can only view a particular
-   vfolder at a time. For multi-vfolder viewing, a message change should
-   propagate through the vfolder system. Certain effects (as in our
-   example) would not be intuitive.
-   </para>
-   <para> 
-   It would not be a clean solution to make special cases but they may be 
-   necessary where certain defined fields are ignored when they are
-   changed. Some combination of the above rules can be used. I don't
-   think it's an easy solution.
-   </para>
-  </sect2>
-  <sect2>
-   <title>Message inclusion and exclusion</title>
-   <para>
-   Messages are included and excluded also with queries. The final query
-   will have the form of:
-   <programlisting>
-   (and (author "Giao")
-        (criteria value)
-        (not (criteria other-value)))
-   </programlisting>
-   Userland criterias may be a label of some sort. These may be userland
-   labels or Message-IDs. What are the performance issues involved in
-   this? With short circuiting, it's not a major problem.
-   </para>
-   <para>    
-   The criterias and values are determined by the UI. The vfolder
-   mechanism isn't concerned with such issues.
-   </para>
-   <para>   
-   Messages can be included and excluded at will. The idea is often
-   called "arbitrary inclusion/exclusion". This can be done by
-   Message-IDs or other fields. It's been noted that Message-IDs are not
-   unique. 
-   </para>
-   <para>  
-   I propose that any given vfolder is allocated an inclusion label and an 
-   exclusion label. These should be randomly generated. This should be
-   part of the vfolder description. It should be noted that the vfolder
-   description has not been drafted yet.
-   </para>
-   <para>   
-   The result is such that the rules for a given named query is:
-   <programlisting>
-   (and (user-query)
-        (label inclusion-label)
-        (not exclusion-label))
-   </programlisting>
-   </para>
-  </sect2>
-  <sect2>
-   <title>Query scheduling</title>
-   <para>
-   Consider the following extremely dynamic queries:
-   <programlisting>
-   A:
-   (and (author "Giao")
-        (sent-after (today-midnight)))
-   
-   B:
-   (and (sent-after (today-midnight))
-        (author "Giao"))
-   
-   C:
-   (or (author "Giao")
-       (sent-after (today-midnight)))
-   </programlisting>
-   Query A would be significantly faster because (author "Giao") is not
-   dynamic. A summary file could be generated for this query. Query B is
-   slow and can be optimized if there was a query compiler of some
-   sort. Query C demonstrates a query in which there is no good
-   optimization which can be applied. These come with a certain amount of
-   baggage.
-   </para>
-   <para>
-   It seems then that for boolean 'and' operations, plain forms should be 
-   moved forward and other queries should be moved such that they are
-   evaluated later. I would expect that the majority of queries would be
-   of the plain form.
-   </para>
-   <para>  
-   First is that the summary file is tied to the query and the store
-   where the query originates from. Second, a hashing function for
-   strings needs to be calculated for the query so that the query and the 
-   summary file can be associated. This hashing function could be similar 
-   to the hashing function described in Rob Pike's "The Practice of
-   Programming". (FIXME: Stick page number here)
-   </para>
-  </sect2>
-  <sect2>
-   <title>Archives</title>
-   <para>
-   Many people are concerned that archives won't be preserved, archives
-   aren't supported, and many other archive related issues. This is the
-   short version.
-   </para>
-   <para>    
-   Archives are just that, archives. Archives are stores. Take your
-   vfolder, export it to a store. You are done. If you load up the store
-   again, then the default-vfolder of that store is the view of the
-   vfolder, except the query is different.
-   </para>
-   <para>    
-   The point to vfolder is not to do away with classical folder
-   representation but to move the queries to the front where it would
-   make data management easier for people who don't think in terms of
-   files but in terms of queries because ordinary people don't think in
-   terms of files.
-   </para>    
-  </sect2>
- </sect1>
+  <!-- Summary files -->
+  <sect1>
+    <title>Summary files</title> 
+    <para>    
+      Summary files are only meaningful when applied to the context of the
+      default-vfolder of a store.
+    </para>
+    <para>
+      Summary files should be generated for queries of the form:
+      <programlisting>
+(function "constant value")
+      </programlisting>
+      Summary files should never be generated for queries of the form:
+      <programlisting>
+	(function (function1))
+	
+	(and (function "value")
+	(another-function "another value"))
+      </programlisting>
+      Given a query of the form:
+      <programlisting>
+	(and (function "value")
+	(another-function "another value"))
+      </programlisting>
+      The system should use one summary file for (function "value") and
+      another summary file for (another-function "another value"). I will
+      call the prior form the "plain form".
+    </para>
+    <para>
+      It should be noted that the signature of the store should be based on
+      the assumption that new data may have been added to the store since
+      the application generated the summary file. Signatures generated on
+      the entirety of the store will most likely be meaningless for things
+      like POP/IMAP servers. 
+    </para>
+  </sect1>
 
- <sect1>
-  <title>Miscellany</title>
-  <sect2>
-   <title>Annotations</title>
-   <para>
-   There should be a scheme to add annotations to messages. Common mail
-   user agents have used a tag in the message header to mark messages as
-   read/unread for example. Extending on this we have the ability to add
-   our own data to a message to add meaning to it. If we have a good
-   scheme for doing this, new possibilities are opened.
-   </para>
-   <sect3>
-    <title>Keywords</title>  
+  <!-- Incremental Indexing -->
+  <sect1>
+    <title>Incremental indexing</title> 
     <para>
-    When sending a message, a message could have certain keywords attached 
-    to it. While this can be done with the subject line, the subject line
-    has a tendency to be munged by other mail applications. One popular
-    example is the "[rR]e:" prefix. Using the subject line also breaks the 
-    "contract" with other mail user agents. Using keywords in another
-    field in the message header allows the sender to assist the recipient
-    in organizing data automatically. Note that the sender can only
-    provide hints as the sender is unlikely to know the organization
-    schemes of the recipient.
+      When new messages are detected, all known queries should be evaluated
+      on the new messages. vfolders should be notified of new messages that
+      are positive matches for their queries. The indexes generated by this
+      process should be merged into the current indexes for the vfolder.
     </para>
-   </sect3>
-  </sect2>
-  <sect2>
-   <title>Scope</title>  
-   <para>
-   Let us assume that we have multiple stores. Does a query work on a
-   given store? Or does it work on all stores? Or is it configurable such 
-   that a query can work on a user-selected list of stores?
-   </para>
-  </sect2>
- </sect1>
+  </sect1>
 
- <sect1>
-  <title>Alternatives to the above</title>
-  <para>
-  Jim Meyer (purp@selequa.com) is putting some notes on where
-  annotations needs to be located. They'll be located here as well as
-  any contributions I may have to them.
-  </para>
- </sect1>
+  <!-- Can I have multiple stores -->
+  <sect1>
+    <title>Can I have multiple stores?</title> 
+    <para> 
+      I don't see why not. Again, the inbox is a vfolder so you can get a
+      unified inbox consisting of all new mail sent to all your stores or
+      your can get inboxes for each store or any combination your heart
+      desire. You get your cake, eat it, and someone else cleans the dishes!
+    </para>
+  </sect1>
+
+  <!-- Why all this? -->
+  <sect1>
+    <title>Why all this?</title> 
+    <para> 
+      Consider the dynamic nature of the following query:
+      <programlisting>
+(and (author "Giao")
+  (sent-after (today-midnight)))
+      </programlisting>
+      today-midnight would be a function that is evaluated at run-time to
+      calculate the appropriate object.
+    </para>
+  </sect1>
+
+  <!-- Scenarios of usage and their solutions -->
+  <sect1>
+    <title>Scenarios of usage and their solutions</title> 
+    <sect2>
+      <title>Mesage alterations</title>
+      <para>
+	This is a fuzzy area that should be left to the UI to handle. Messages 
+	are altered. Read status are altered when a new message is read for
+	example. How do we handle this if our query is for unread messages?
+	Upon viewing the state would change.
+      </para>
+      <para>
+	One idea is to not evaluate the queries unless we're changing between
+	vfolder views. This assumes that one can only view a particular
+	vfolder at a time. For multi-vfolder viewing, a message change should
+	propagate through the vfolder system. Certain effects (as in our
+	example) would not be intuitive.
+      </para>
+      <para> 
+	It would not be a clean solution to make special cases but they may be 
+	necessary where certain defined fields are ignored when they are
+	changed. Some combination of the above rules can be used. I don't
+	think it's an easy solution.
+      </para>
+    </sect2>
+    <sect2>
+      <title>Message inclusion and exclusion</title>
+      <para>
+	Messages are included and excluded also with queries. The final query
+	will have the form of:
+	<programlisting>
+	  (and (author "Giao")
+	  (criteria value)
+	  (not (criteria other-value)))
+	</programlisting>
+	Userland criterias may be a label of some sort. These may be userland
+	labels or Message-IDs. What are the performance issues involved in
+	this? With short circuiting, it's not a major problem.
+      </para>
+      <para>    
+	The criterias and values are determined by the UI. The vfolder
+	mechanism isn't concerned with such issues.
+      </para>
+      <para>   
+	Messages can be included and excluded at will. The idea is often
+	called "arbitrary inclusion/exclusion". This can be done by
+	Message-IDs or other fields. It's been noted that Message-IDs are not
+	unique. 
+      </para>
+      <para>  
+	I propose that any given vfolder is allocated an inclusion label and an 
+	exclusion label. These should be randomly generated. This should be
+	part of the vfolder description. It should be noted that the vfolder
+	description has not been drafted yet.
+      </para>
+      <para>   
+	The result is such that the rules for a given named query is:
+	<programlisting>
+	  (and (user-query)
+	  (label inclusion-label)
+	  (not exclusion-label))
+	</programlisting>
+      </para>
+    </sect2>
+    <sect2>
+      <title>Query scheduling</title>
+      <para>
+	Consider the following extremely dynamic queries:
+	<programlisting>
+	  A:
+	  (and (author "Giao")
+	  (sent-after (today-midnight)))
+	  
+	  B:
+	  (and (sent-after (today-midnight))
+	  (author "Giao"))
+	  
+	  C:
+	  (or (author "Giao")
+	  (sent-after (today-midnight)))
+	</programlisting>
+	Query A would be significantly faster because (author "Giao") is not
+	dynamic. A summary file could be generated for this query. Query B is
+	slow and can be optimized if there was a query compiler of some
+	sort. Query C demonstrates a query in which there is no good
+	optimization which can be applied. These come with a certain amount of
+	baggage.
+      </para>
+      <para>
+	It seems then that for boolean 'and' operations, plain forms should be 
+	moved forward and other queries should be moved such that they are
+	evaluated later. I would expect that the majority of queries would be
+	of the plain form.
+      </para>
+      <para>  
+	First is that the summary file is tied to the query and the store
+	where the query originates from. Second, a hashing function for
+	strings needs to be calculated for the query so that the query and the 
+	summary file can be associated. This hashing function could be similar 
+	to the hashing function described in Rob Pike's "The Practice of
+	Programming". (FIXME: Stick page number here)
+      </para>
+    </sect2>
+    <sect2>
+      <title>Archives</title>
+      <para>
+	Many people are concerned that archives won't be preserved, archives
+	aren't supported, and many other archive related issues. This is the
+	short version.
+      </para>
+      <para>    
+	Archives are just that, archives. Archives are stores. Take your
+	vfolder, export it to a store. You are done. If you load up the store
+	again, then the default-vfolder of that store is the view of the
+	vfolder, except the query is different.
+      </para>
+      <para>    
+	The point to vfolder is not to do away with classical folder
+	representation but to move the queries to the front where it would
+	make data management easier for people who don't think in terms of
+	files but in terms of queries because ordinary people don't think in
+	terms of files.
+      </para>    
+    </sect2>
+  </sect1>
+
+  <!-- Miscellany -->
+  <sect1>
+    <title>Miscellany</title>
+    <sect2>
+      <title>Annotations</title>
+      <para>
+	There should be a scheme to add annotations to messages. Common mail
+	user agents have used a tag in the message header to mark messages as
+	read/unread for example. Extending on this we have the ability to add
+	our own data to a message to add meaning to it. If we have a good
+	scheme for doing this, new possibilities are opened.
+      </para>
+      <sect3>
+	<title>Keywords</title>  
+	<para>
+	  When sending a message, a message could have certain keywords attached 
+	  to it. While this can be done with the subject line, the subject line
+	  has a tendency to be munged by other mail applications. One popular
+	  example is the "[rR]e:" prefix. Using the subject line also breaks the 
+	  "contract" with other mail user agents. Using keywords in another
+	  field in the message header allows the sender to assist the recipient
+	  in organizing data automatically. Note that the sender can only
+	  provide hints as the sender is unlikely to know the organization
+	  schemes of the recipient.
+	</para>
+      </sect3>
+    </sect2>
+    <sect2>
+      <title>Scope</title>  
+      <para>
+	Let us assume that we have multiple stores. Does a query work on a
+	given store? Or does it work on all stores? Or is it configurable such 
+	that a query can work on a user-selected list of stores?
+      </para>
+    </sect2>
+  </sect1>
+
+  <!-- Alternatives to the above -->
+  <sect1>
+    <title>Alternatives to the above</title>
+    <para>
+      Jim Meyer (purp@selequa.com) is putting some notes on where
+      annotations needs to be located. They'll be located here as well as
+      any contributions I may have to them.
+    </para>
+  </sect1>
 </article>