Re: Archive File Size
- From: "Brian Tillman" <tillman1952@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 09:40:17 -0400
Ding Bat <billyg1943@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear Bill, Please add to Oultook Wish List: archiving by other dates too!
This doesn't seem reasonable to me. An archive should contain items in which you've shown no interest (i.e., haven't referenced) in a particular period of time. Opening, moving, or otherwise manipulating a message, no matter how long ago it was created, indicates that the message contains information relevent to the present. Thus, the modified date seems the only reasonable measure of whether or not a message should be archived _by automatic means_. Archiving by other dates via an automatic process couldn't help but include items recently referenced that, potentially, are of current interest. unless every single item had a new attribute diabling archiving for that item, which would be an administrative nightmare. People would set it, forget it was set and then, months later wonder why items weren't being archived, just as they do now, only finding the reason would be much more problematic due to the number of items that would have to be examined individually. I just don't see this as viable.
--
Brian Tillman
.
- References:
- Archive File Size
- From: Ding Bat
- Re: Archive File Size
- From: Judy Gleeson MVP - Outlook
- Re: Archive File Size
- From: Bill
- Re: Archive File Size
- From: Judy Gleeson MVP - Outlook
- Re: Archive File Size
- From: Ding Bat
- Re: Archive File Size
- From: Judy Gleeson MVP Outlook
- Re: Archive File Size
- From: Ding Bat
- Re: Archive File Size
- From: Judy Gleeson MVP - Outlook
- Archive File Size
- Prev by Date: Re: Rules in Outlook 2003
- Next by Date: Re: Recipient can't see special characters (apostrophe, double quote, hyphen, etc.)
- Previous by thread: Re: Archive File Size
- Next by thread: Re: Archive File Size
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|