[feedback-report] Extensible Feedback Type Proposal

[J.D. Falk]

On 2005-09-29 11:26, Justin Rietz wrote:

> I would like to "officially" propose that ARF allow for custom feedback 
> types in addition to the standard Feedback-
> Type field as an X-Feedback-Type.
>  
> Reasons / Comments:
> 1.  Report senders may want to offer their users the ability to select 
> from complaint types not already established in ARF
> 2.  Report recipients may request additional feedback data from report 
> senders
> 3.  Standard feedback types would be unchanged, thus retaining all the 
> original elements of the current version of ARF
> 4.  Report senders could publish definitions of their X-Feedback-Type 
> fields for report recipients who wish to use the custom feedback data
> 5.  Report recipients could choose to accept all, some, or none of 
> any X-Feedback-Type fields in an ARF report

So if the report sender uses a feedback type that the report recipient 
doesn't know about yet...what should happen?

> Given the current feedback types, an email recipient cannot register 
> multiple complaints/requests i.e. "opt-out" and "abuse."  While it could 
> reasonably be assumed that someone who submits an "abuse" complaint also 
> wants also to opt-out of the email, this may not be always the case.  
> There is real-world example of an online retailer (who shall go unamed) 
> who sent too many purchase confirmations and irritated customers; 
> however, those customers surely still wanted to receive original 
> purchase confirmation.

If I were a report recipient, how would I know that a report with 
multiple feedback types actually means "don't send so many 
confirmations, but keep sending me other stuff?"

> To the comments that custom feedback types defy the idea of a standard, 
> I would argue that a standard should define the format of the data, 
> estalish boundaries for what is and isn't allowed, and contain common 
> elements (i.e. standard Feedback-Type fields ) that everyone agrees to 
> use.  However, I believe the standard should also retain enough 
> flexibility for users to be able do some customization but still conform 
> to the standard. Given the rapidly changing environment of phishing and 
> spamming, I believe ARF needs to allow for this type of flexibility in 
> order to remain up-to-date with what is occuring in the real world.

The spec doesn't say "these are the only feedback types that there shall 
ever be no matter what" -- it includes a method for adding new types, 
which is compatible with existing standard methods.

And, as others have said, if a report generator & report recipient want 
to set up a new type just between themselves, there's nothing stopping 
them from doing so.  It's just text, after all.

-- 
J.D. Falk, Anti-Spam Product Manager
Yahoo! Communications Platform Team