Peter Wang <novalazy@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 21:08:05 +0100, Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I have reviewed all the new parts of this series (judged as being >> patches 3-8) and the changes made to my two patches and they are all >> fine (with one small comment below). Patch 1/8 does need a proper review >> though as it ended up more intrusive than I would have liked. >> >> > +Messages matching search.tag_exclude are called "excluded messages". >> >> My one comment is that this is not quite true if the corresponding tag >> is in the query. Since you are defining the term it would be nice to >> mention that, but I can't see a clean wording. > > How about: > > A message is called "excluded" if it matches at least one tag > in search.tag_exclude that does not appear explicitly in the search > terms. I think this wording is excellent (and prefer it to the less dense wording). Best wishes Mark > Or less densely: > > Let "excluded tags" be the set of tags listed in search.tag_exclude, > minus any tags which appear explicitly in the search terms. > A message is an "excluded message" if it matches one or more > excluded tags. > > Peter