Re: New approach to grouping/backend/marking - good or bad idea?

[Colin Marquardt <colin.marquardt@gmx.de>]

* Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu> writes:

> There are two bits here.  The bit that I feel pretty sure is a good
> idea is that of adding "message keywords" to Gnus.  Imagine that you
> can (either manually, or via automatic means like the split process),
> add arbitrary keywords to articles.  These keywords could then be used
> for whatever you like, but I could imeediately see a use for them in
> searches, narrows, etc.  This would easily eliminate all the arguments
> that keep me from being happy just using total-expire.

> For example, I would like to use a "todo" keyword, and attach that to
> articles that I need to do something about.  Then I could enter a
> group and do a "/ k todo" or whatever, and see all those articles.

Karl Kleinpaste has written
| ;;; messkeyw.el --- automatic keyword support during composition.
which is part of GNU Emacs (so it says).

| ;; This provides a hookable mechanism by which to have Keywords
| ;; headers automatically generated based on word frequency of the
| ;; body.  The goal is to make it possible to score on Keywords
| ;; provided, of course, that Keywords gets to the overview files.

I seem to remember that there was a HOWTO somewhere about adding the
keywords afterwards to exisiting articles.

This may be a start.

Colin