On 8 February 2017 at 07:26, Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > That’s good to know. I’m wondering if implementing a generic email client > (rather than a specific “gmail” or “live” client) isn’t becoming ever > harder. With so many older and newer services, a client has to support pop3, > imap, smtp, EWS, ActiveSync, and maybe a few of the others you mentioned. > This effort proposes to add yet another one. > It does; but as someone who has had to implement IMAP from both sides, I think it's worthwhile to revisit IMAP's space and look at a green-field rewrite. JMAP works well particularly for web-based, client-centric development; that's a space I've seen a lot of, and particularly a considerable amount of more innovative deployments of existing protocol work (such as XMPP, which is also very web-friendly). I would suspect that if we can pull JMAP together and see reasonable deployment, we'll see an increasing demand for its use for all manner of things we have yet to think of. It seems to be well-thought through for mobile, too. While I agree, with feeling, that writing a generic desktop MUA has become increasingly hard in recent years, I also note that this isn't what consumers seem to want either. Consumers respond much better to Web and/or Mobile - and JMAP makes it considerably simpler to write either. TL;DR: Yes. Dave.