The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'IMAP METADATA Extension '
<draft-daboo-imap-annotatemore-12.txt> as a Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2008-01-30. Exceptionally,
comments may be sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please
retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
The file can be obtained via
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-daboo-imap-annotatemore-12.txt
Hi Cyrus,
As discussed earlier, below is the list of issues raised by various
people you've asked to reraise during IETF LC:
1). What IMAP rights are required to set public and private annotations
on the server?
No rights are required, but I think this should be stated explicitly.
2).
... If the collation identifier is
specified, then that collation MUST be used to do the comparison of
the annotation entry values being tested.
What if the collation is unknown to the server? Does it fail with an
error? What error?
Explicitly stated that a BAD be returned.
For consistency with draft-ietf-imapext-i18n-14.txt (which is a
normative dependency for draft-daboo-imap-annotatemore), I suggest
changing this to tagged NO response and adding a requirement to return
BADCOMPARATOR response code defined in draft-ietf-imapext-i18n.
3).
C: a SETMETADATA INBOX.% /comment
Is it really necessary to allow arbitrary wildcards for SETMETADATA?
It's a lot of complexity and I'm not sure it's useful.
[...]
It also seems excessively complex to support both "%" and "*" at
arbitrary points in the match. Wouldn't it be simpler and sufficient to
just support "*" at the end?
In response to this: while I agree that support for "%" and "*" in
arbitrary matches is not that useful, this is consistent with IMAP LIST
command and the same pattern matching code can be used for both.
4). The latest version defines 2 IMAP extensions: METADATA-SERVER and
METADATA (the latter being a superset of the former).
For ease of coding clients I suggest that any server advertising the
latter MUST also advertise the former.
Regards,
Alexey
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf