From barryleiba@gmail.com Tue Jan 15 12:37:19 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB56A21F854E for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:37:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.133 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.133 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.156, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7HzKMJktqZ6N for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:37:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lb0-f170.google.com (mail-lb0-f170.google.com [209.85.217.170]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA1D121F8552 for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:37:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lb0-f170.google.com with SMTP id j14so486483lbo.15 for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:37:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=hYMranS4ePDGXze51S6VhBou+/ogvvlco8GPif2yrso=; b=GTPX5gYzeUHs7DWk5tuH+5023ge7OHtSqdsogEcfLyZ7a+OEKuAOgOnziktVgjm41J QWywRpPbUiufbWxIs1ih2WrRqKCVTXOSLk5uZFWMeY+PIzcM5iEE/VgNDkS7I/vFSooT gORG7wJB6N+vfi/HYZi0SQQsRbZtDmkEaHoO+ajfSa6ZlG/SZyVCBhOGuQN2rghrm1iu LP0tz8gzYfpz0ymy0xRSZVdLFS5dfFXOwmL351CVilrDMtkyHJ3MZpoaKm/V6H40eI1A twOZLZQEPAwGgrljYO8hDk6risYcNjw6Nsi+sjoecxilKWK1223S5+X7dVCeRu4j1WiN EDWg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.144.130 with SMTP id sm2mr87388903lab.49.1358282233590; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:37:13 -0800 (PST) Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com Received: by 10.112.47.168 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:37:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 15:37:13 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: bI7tVFEdzo5XT5v1tT9TXmmDyPA Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: "imapext@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 20:37:20 -0000 I've given Eric a hand in creating a simple I-D to define a new special-use mailbox attribute, which Google uses and which seems to make sense to standardize. As the document says, "\Important", defined here, differs from "\Flagged", in that the latter typically contains messages with the \Flagged flag, while "\Important" contains messages that have been heuristically determined to be "important" to the user. So \Flagged groups messages that the user has marked, while \Important groups ones the system has identified. The document also creates a registry for special-use attributes, and registers all those from the special-use spec. Please give it a once-over, and comment. If it looks good to folks, I'll ask Murray to handle it in appsawg, or see if Pete wants to AD-sponsor it. Barry, as participant On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 1:18 PM, wrote: > > A new version of I-D, draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt > has been successfully submitted by Eric Iceman and posted to the > IETF repository. > > Filename: draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important > Revision: 00 > Title: IMAP LIST Special-Use Attribute: \Important > Creation date: 2013-01-14 > WG ID: Individual Submission > Number of pages: 6 > URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt > Status: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important > Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00 > > Abstract: > RFC 6154 created an IMAP Special-Use LIST extension and defined an > initial set of attributes. This document defines a new attribute, > "\Important", and establishes a new IANA registry for IMAP Special- > Use LIST extension folder attributes, updating RFC 6154. > From barryleiba@gmail.com Wed Jan 16 15:42:57 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6207F21F8319 for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:42:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.121 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.121 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.144, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i1DIncrAQHPM for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:42:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-la0-f46.google.com (mail-la0-f46.google.com [209.85.215.46]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8132C21F8587 for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:42:55 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-la0-f46.google.com with SMTP id fq13so2044399lab.33 for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:42:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=5slz855yjv8K+O87QGeSE49pzsk4yZj1XSnY6xCgXpM=; b=0cfKCTI+WhTa8n4p+/2YfZcdd0x15h65CJM0FV5L1l1ko3GrE62bibfNqaTIkX9t2O wUY6Y67nAWadONtEqDvPvDg2wOjQTJXt+VG3uNGZIme5NB8KLB/Xp/EbAc2ETNYQ9c8x 11/Og/9KhjJRrxdl7J9AotjPhstsfe5rOMvX74SxgdGjcRzpKopQdz/EBA+jjRSmRIhs KIhI3j7XzmSmEnuBi79EY/OkHhG1Sy3gOnnpQoKyfACX0r1v+2eEGmEpv/f6ef1Yx1/4 NLG4lHr8nf5SGE9x+ALyObWQVk+TFe/d2TLwzv+zPNsrrkbhrJEGRk4kPzfii8snoOTU jnRA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.98.197 with SMTP id ek5mr1359235lbb.80.1358379774393; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:42:54 -0800 (PST) Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com Received: by 10.112.47.168 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:42:54 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 18:42:54 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ul4WvGNS-hRK1Ahlos3aOanzUvU Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: "imapext@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: [imapext] IMAPMOVE wrapping up X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 23:42:57 -0000 Alexey has put the current information about implementations into the working group wiki: http://tools.ietf.org/wg/imapmove/trac/wiki This completes the last chartered milestone (a few weeks early, actually), and the Secretariat has marked that milestone as done: http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/imapmove/charter/ Additionally, the MOVE specification, which is in the RFC Editor queue, is now in AUTH48 state -- the final editing and author review before it's published, which means that it should be published as an RFC within the next week or two. As soon as the RFC is published, I will ask the Secretariat to formally close down the working group. I want to take this opportunity to send out some thanks to * Arnt for taking the lead on the document, * everyone who reviewed, commented, and implemented, * Alexey and Ned for chairing (and Ned for doing editing while Arnt was under the weather). I consider this working group a smashing success: we chartered it quickly and gave it a focused, short-term task, it met its goals and its schedule, and we have a new, standard IMAP extension for something people have been asking for for years. This is also the first IMAP-related RFC that will be published after Mark Crispin's untimely passing. We wouldn't be here doing this without his earlier work. Barry, Applications AD From alexey.melnikov@isode.com Thu Jan 17 07:17:52 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B59AE21F8596 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:17:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.97 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.97 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.363, BAYES_00=-2.599, DATE_IN_PAST_12_24=0.992, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iF7yJy6uKrvA for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:17:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from statler.isode.com (statler.isode.com [62.3.217.254]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1B7E21F8584 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:17:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1358435867; d=isode.com; s=selector; i=@isode.com; bh=9LX8NfoZHwtf55iGySsuw9Rrrf3G71Z60tj/sgEZNIs=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=xc1ZuP2xkZpaPTPKHmwMMu5h3QxeXVk7NZbqTT7RalDE6/gzYbP72Jyp5wtxmq5h5075mR KIeifTpvABiHTwbkPT6Rt4v0btWDX348f0o4kBlxzjHcsd+zhz5twKBialzVtge1m7wvvO +Wk4+iHO5LJXk3AHU8V5PCj8/NuMaFM=; Received: from [172.16.1.29] (shiny.isode.com [62.3.217.250]) by statler.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:17:47 +0000 Message-ID: <50F72AF1.5060204@isode.com> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:34:25 +0000 From: Alexey Melnikov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 To: Barry Leiba References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important@tools.ietf.org, "imapext@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:17:53 -0000 Hi Barry, On 15/01/2013 20:37, Barry Leiba wrote: > I've given Eric a hand in creating a simple I-D to define a new > special-use mailbox attribute, which Google uses and which seems to > make sense to standardize. As the document says, "\Important", > defined here, differs from "\Flagged", in that the latter typically > contains messages with the \Flagged flag, while "\Important" contains > messages that have been heuristically determined to be "important" to > the user. So \Flagged groups messages that the user has marked, while > \Important groups ones the system has identified. > > The document also creates a registry for special-use attributes, and > registers all those from the special-use spec. > > Please give it a once-over, and comment. This basically looks fine, but I think you should change the registry to be the registry of all mailbox attributes (including the ones defined in RFC 3501 and LIST-EXTENDED). The designated expert would have to check for conflicts with these names anyway, so make it easier for her/him. From barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com Thu Jan 17 07:51:10 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C49421F86F4 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:51:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.114 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.114 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.137, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IBRqtHlXa-Lz for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:51:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vc0-f178.google.com (mail-vc0-f178.google.com [209.85.220.178]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FBF421F86CD for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:51:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vc0-f178.google.com with SMTP id m8so1881805vcd.9 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:51:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=yJhO6yyLNdS2UTZzEiBg5LPwrAvaY1tCtGNmg5E9N54=; b=a5Q0XMVdiy2WsUNQ3TtbybBKPUAwOH1wugPHbhVZzN6MBkU2wtMLWTigUBq5HSK+rz QVmnupviYOOlzd8ln6xltJhYCK+pD27TKd17jBnwvGljVfgEl6sZVbgC5VGXEfDQHLmM 4V4hWtlB+rTq0NOavRdpbWXftbAg3e3mUgS26VTOyD0bxTAVw/9Wew50GNT3hsliXhbg e0stVIl+BDWHzkdZjERl2g1cmYc5U0OXqwbXlN4KpkF/Tt4piA5BeQVnhG6jO++fa+rz F5XzWttcemLQ/srv9zaNjqPkvLGmt8y7sAkXsjGmjHsLKIuvWxz2ZRej/PGhrU/QgZIP qIDg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.66.18 with SMTP id b18mr5060157vdt.43.1358437868781; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:51:08 -0800 (PST) Sender: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com Received: by 10.59.3.41 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:51:08 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <50F72AF1.5060204@isode.com> References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <50F72AF1.5060204@isode.com> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:51:08 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: nwP47epovx3A9cHN1Q2jnBReh8Y Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: Alexey Melnikov Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important@tools.ietf.org, "imapext@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:51:10 -0000 > This basically looks fine, but I think you should change the registry to be > the registry of all mailbox attributes (including the ones defined in RFC > 3501 and LIST-EXTENDED). The designated expert would have to check for > conflicts with these names anyway, so make it easier for her/him. That makes sense, and it's a good idea; we'll make that change. Barry From cyrus@daboo.name Thu Jan 17 08:24:28 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8625921F8778 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 08:24:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qzoHzFZUXxf6 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 08:24:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [173.13.55.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9482B21F856D for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 08:24:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 132BF3B2952E; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:24:25 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at example.com Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (daboo.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id s77Sv1OE62lh; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:24:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from [17.45.162.221] (unknown [17.45.162.221]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2736C3B2951B; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:24:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:24:29 -0500 From: Cyrus Daboo To: Barry Leiba , imapext@ietf.org Message-ID: <2CDBE6605058EA83E82E46F3@cyrus.local> In-Reply-To: References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; size=1457 Cc: draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:24:28 -0000 Hi Barry, --On January 15, 2013 3:37:13 PM -0500 Barry Leiba wrote: > Please give it a once-over, and comment. If it looks good to folks, > I'll ask Murray to handle it in appsawg, or see if Pete wants to > AD-sponsor it. I don't think there is enough detail to properly explain the intent of the \Important flag. Specifically: 1) Are clients allowed to set the \Important flag on a CREATE or is it expected that only the server manages use of this flag? 2) What if the flag appears on multiple mailboxes? How is the user expected to differentiate between the possible use cases listed in Section 2? This is important because there is an implication that copying messages into "important" mailboxes may have side-effects, and it really needs to be absolutely clear to the user what those might be and how those side-effects may differ across different \Important mailboxes. 3) The example in section 2 of users copying messages into the mailbox to "train" the system seems wrong. Why should a user have to duplicate (copy) (or perhaps move) messages around to "train" the server. Shouldn't that be handled by message keywords instead? i.e., a $Important flag that can be set on a message to tell the server to "train"? 4) What is the expected client behavior here? I am assuming that the expectation is that clients should show \Important mailboxes more prominently than non-\Important ones? -- Cyrus Daboo From barryleiba@gmail.com Thu Jan 17 09:40:29 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8F1921F866D for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:40:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.112 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.112 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.135, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RSzCc5Nj8rvY for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:40:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-la0-f52.google.com (mail-la0-f52.google.com [209.85.215.52]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CD0921F87AD for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:40:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-la0-f52.google.com with SMTP id ee20so834667lab.25 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:40:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=y7TJVUFQPcUhsKW+NNvmZu/eSRxkBMJ+gf+iibMJuPA=; b=FAoaBzIstHXHVdnfT29yPEE6PY9E62nDyBWRZH+K7Ct8NaVOhtPhJ827eqGN9LTm9X HutESu/x7FeaC2ksFevQHB9IXEolt/eD5uYl2P1BdE/LAu0/hfk7QZUVdjINPMzz71Dr lgF0LfGupSel1EjEXp7wTH1rUIr7z6jbC5laoNT1Ofj3GeUZAykbldZtCh5a8Te0fAzE MyqXYd7QA1grYNzbVCaH5exz/5wZhhRDFpC1md++JOS21BpHRgP2M+weCbKV2UESJqXs yA3VmvEs7HcFugtKVJTHyYKye7w4HnR+g69igFBJB0K/hRIJXerBNPtL3GUu4F2WiJ1E acOw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.125.136 with SMTP id mq8mr5646603lab.41.1358444427494; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:40:27 -0800 (PST) Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com Received: by 10.112.47.168 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:40:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <2CDBE6605058EA83E82E46F3@cyrus.local> References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2CDBE6605058EA83E82E46F3@cyrus.local> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:40:27 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 4fkindVgudDsq-FSLo0-RvznnSA Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: Cyrus Daboo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important@tools.ietf.org, "imapext@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 17:40:29 -0000 > I don't think there is enough detail to properly explain the intent of the > \Important flag. Interesting. The detail is comparable to (actually, a bit more than) what's in 6154 for the other special-use attributes. Perhaps you'd wish that those were also more richly specified, but the water under that bridge has sailed, to horribly mix some metaphors. > 1) Are clients allowed to set the \Important flag on a CREATE or is it > expected that only the server manages use of this flag? I don't see why this is any different to any of the other special-use attributes in that regard, nor why we'd have to say that. > 2) What if the flag appears on multiple mailboxes? How is the user expected > to differentiate between the possible use cases listed in Section 2? This is > important because there is an implication that copying messages into > "important" mailboxes may have side-effects, and it really needs to be > absolutely clear to the user what those might be and how those side-effects > may differ across different \Important mailboxes. I don't see why this is any different to the others either. 6154 says this about that, in general: In most cases, there will likely be at most one mailbox with a given attribute for a given user, but in some server or message store implementations it might be possible for multiple mailboxes to have the same special-use attribute. Other special-use attributes have side effects as well, even if they're not specified in 6154 (again, bridges and water, and all that). If you copy a message in to a mailbox with the \Junk attribute, servers might take that as an indication that it was spam that got missed, and pass it to their spam learning engine. Messages in a mailbox with the \Trash or \Junk attributes will probably be auto-deleted by the server after a period of time. As with all special-use mailboxes, the exact meaning is server-dependent. > 3) The example in section 2 of users copying messages into the mailbox to > "train" the system seems wrong. Why should a user have to duplicate (copy) > (or perhaps move) messages around to "train" the server. Shouldn't that be > handled by message keywords instead? i.e., a $Important flag that can be set > on a message to tell the server to "train"? That's probably a good point. Eric will need to weigh in on that one, but it might be better to remove that (and the side effect it implies). Eric? > 4) What is the expected client behavior here? I am assuming that the > expectation is that clients should show \Important mailboxes more > prominently than non-\Important ones? That'd be up to the client, as with all the other mailbox special uses. This is giving information to the client, and we're not here to say what the UI should do with it. Similarly, RFC 3501 doesn't say anything about what a client should do with \Marked, or, for that matter, \Noinferiors. Barry From cyrus@daboo.name Thu Jan 17 11:21:53 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6117E21F886B for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:21:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kg4wFxHo7JVG for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:21:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [173.13.55.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 351A621F8845 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:21:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 906A03B2C430; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:21:50 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at example.com Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (daboo.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QWr502ubQ4G8; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:21:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from caldav.corp.apple.com (unknown [17.45.162.46]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F25EA3B2C422; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:21:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:21:40 -0500 From: Cyrus Daboo To: Barry Leiba Message-ID: <7C9B91F6A03F17A98EAA26EC@caldav.corp.apple.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2CDBE6605058EA83E82E46F3@cyrus.local> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; size=3877 Cc: draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important@tools.ietf.org, imapext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:21:53 -0000 Hi Barry, --On January 17, 2013 at 12:40:27 PM -0500 Barry Leiba wrote: >> 1) Are clients allowed to set the \Important flag on a CREATE or is it >> expected that only the server manages use of this flag? > > I don't see why this is any different to any of the other special-use > attributes in that regard, nor why we'd have to say that. This could be more a deficiency of 6154 in that it does not let the client know which special use flags would be acceptable for use with CREATE. That makes it hard to build a UI that only shows valid options to the user. >> 2) What if the flag appears on multiple mailboxes? How is the user >> expected to differentiate between the possible use cases listed in >> Section 2? This is important because there is an implication that >> copying messages into "important" mailboxes may have side-effects, and >> it really needs to be absolutely clear to the user what those might be >> and how those side-effects may differ across different \Important >> mailboxes. > > I don't see why this is any different to the others either. 6154 says > this about that, in general: > > In most cases, there will likely be at most one mailbox with > a given attribute for a given user, but in some server or message > store implementations it might be possible for multiple mailboxes to > have the same special-use attribute. > > Other special-use attributes have side effects as well, even if > they're not specified in 6154 (again, bridges and water, and all > that). If you copy a message in to a mailbox with the \Junk > attribute, servers might take that as an indication that it was spam > that got missed, and pass it to their spam learning engine. Messages > in a mailbox with the \Trash or \Junk attributes will probably be > auto-deleted by the server after a period of time. > > As with all special-use mailboxes, the exact meaning is server-dependent. That is not true. Several flag definitions in 6154 (e.g. \Sent, \Draft) state that they can have special meaning to a client as well - i.e. that is where clients automatically store things. So, are clients allowed to treat \Important as a place to automatically store "important" messages? This touches on my point #4. >> 3) The example in section 2 of users copying messages into the mailbox to >> "train" the system seems wrong. Why should a user have to duplicate >> (copy) (or perhaps move) messages around to "train" the server. >> Shouldn't that be handled by message keywords instead? i.e., a >> $Important flag that can be set on a message to tell the server to >> "train"? > > That's probably a good point. Eric will need to weigh in on that one, > but it might be better to remove that (and the side effect it > implies). Eric? I still wonder whether what should be defined here as a $Important key word with the meaning that it is something set by the server itself as opposed to \Flagged (message flag) set only by users. Then the \Important mailbox is really a match for \Flagged (mailbox flag) - i.e. "virtual". I think that makes more sense because it is the messages content itself that likely defines importance as that should "stick" to the message no matter what mailbox it might be moved to. >> 4) What is the expected client behavior here? I am assuming that the >> expectation is that clients should show \Important mailboxes more >> prominently than non-\Important ones? > > That'd be up to the client, as with all the other mailbox special > uses. This is giving information to the client, and we're not here to > say what the UI should do with it. Similarly, RFC 3501 doesn't say > anything about what a client should do with \Marked, or, for that > matter, \Noinferiors. Right, but as noted in #2 above, 6154 does state what clients might be expected to do for \Drafts, \Sent etc -- Cyrus Daboo From barryleiba@gmail.com Thu Jan 17 11:38:06 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78B3B21F8629 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:38:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.11 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.11 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.133, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xduBqdc0mf-F for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:38:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lb0-f173.google.com (mail-lb0-f173.google.com [209.85.217.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 936DB21F84ED for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:38:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lb0-f173.google.com with SMTP id gf7so1274981lbb.4 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:38:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=gwmcEXAwVLrPxjRRW/aKOC6v0B0J2dW0Rek568OkmW0=; b=OQ7htxnEU1p95jkBpfSLbzqA0v6lEpG+svENWgKeCcWqFbIl3kUFnLQFO5Y7yaTD9v 94+8gaCKn883P5fwfc5xMUNERfGOcro9j7oCY/ezZJoxHwdc+E3NBTxJspVQ4KNXk4fg yLda1wfub+c34JTL93qCBSr7JH1CR9xBr2Kua+lbswWGj8GhurK6Qh44amSEZR5AuhVQ uCWjwiBI8Seg5OFCZL8LkaNZBL6FUqzP0BcTMbwt6us1G8SNo9Qv0DjTpFdGioU0zEmd 87s7b6hfVnXAA5fB7w/gIdY2LFfH3xPNKbBHQYw6TvCJk8mAd+neYhLVQohcmshLbwvE 91vA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.82.166 with SMTP id j6mr2718356lby.25.1358451484081; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:38:04 -0800 (PST) Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com Received: by 10.112.47.168 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:38:03 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <7C9B91F6A03F17A98EAA26EC@caldav.corp.apple.com> References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2CDBE6605058EA83E82E46F3@cyrus.local> <7C9B91F6A03F17A98EAA26EC@caldav.corp.apple.com> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:38:03 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ePPQ1rufAnAhZEb0qno3gVlxPaE Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: Cyrus Daboo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important@tools.ietf.org, "imapext@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:38:06 -0000 >>> 1) Are clients allowed to set the \Important flag on a CREATE or is it >>> expected that only the server manages use of this flag? > > This could be more a deficiency of 6154 in that it does not let the client > know which special use flags would be acceptable for use with CREATE. That > makes it hard to build a UI that only shows valid options to the user. Right, there is no discovery at all. A server can allow these on CREATE or not, as it pleases, and you can't know. That's how 6154 was designed, for better or worse. >> As with all special-use mailboxes, the exact meaning is server-dependent. > > That is not true. Several flag definitions in 6154 (e.g. \Sent, \Draft) > state that they can have special meaning to a client as well - i.e. that is > where clients automatically store things. So, are clients allowed to treat > \Important as a place to automatically store "important" messages? This > touches on my point #4. No, that *is* true: the descriptions of \Sent and \Draft, for example are very clear that the exact meaning is server-dependent. For example, \Sent says this: Some server implementations might put messages here automatically. Alternatively, this might just be advice that a client save sent messages here. That looks server-dependent to me. If SentMail has the \Sent attribute, a client has no idea from the description in 6154 whether it can do "COPY 234 SentMail" or not. And it has no idea whether the server will automatically put anything there. The description of \Sent is just giving examples of how this is sometimes used. > I still wonder whether what should be defined here as a $Important key word > with the meaning that it is something set by the server itself as opposed to > \Flagged (message flag) set only by users. Then the \Important mailbox is > really a match for \Flagged (mailbox flag) - i.e. "virtual". I think that > makes more sense because it is the messages content itself that likely > defines importance as that should "stick" to the message no matter what > mailbox it might be moved to. That's a good point. And that's certainly how Gmail works: the message is marked important or not, and the "\Important" mailbox is a virtual mailbox that "contains" all messages marked as important. Eric, would you want to extend this spec to also define a message keyword, as Cyrus suggests? Barry From alexey.melnikov@isode.com Thu Jan 17 11:46:45 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57C1821F88E6 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:46:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.407 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.407 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.192, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bvxgI5c9TEAr for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:46:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from statler.isode.com (statler.isode.com [62.3.217.254]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B086221F8906 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:46:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1358451986; d=isode.com; s=selector; i=@isode.com; bh=lUYZqA4OK2cVzTZJFEzMeAs3ou8+4pVGD4MyJCc91r8=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=KoqauCbJYddnTq174bq7gi9ZuHoJjY01HfYZnyP6dS8aMOy6IcexOL4f3hcbSGFmXDP+vU BmV3xtqcqXUi1oFeKB4fZtot8L1Xx2w82PAMbCVLtM81f4M2UGlMZMFqQQf0Oy6dONeXcK ZwSVWQ4TbZjpY6VSjRwWGBgmK5unKVU=; Received: from [172.16.1.29] (shiny.isode.com [62.3.217.250]) by statler.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:46:25 +0000 Message-ID: <50F85517.5010206@isode.com> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:46:31 +0000 From: Alexey Melnikov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 To: imapext@ietf.org References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2CDBE6605058EA83E82E46F3@cyrus.local> <7C9B91F6A03F17A98EAA26EC@caldav.corp.apple.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:46:45 -0000 On 17/01/2013 19:38, Barry Leiba wrote: [...] >> I still wonder whether what should be defined here as a $Important key word >> with the meaning that it is something set by the server itself as opposed to >> \Flagged (message flag) set only by users. Then the \Important mailbox is >> really a match for \Flagged (mailbox flag) - i.e. "virtual". I think that >> makes more sense because it is the messages content itself that likely >> defines importance as that should "stick" to the message no matter what >> mailbox it might be moved to. > That's a good point. And that's certainly how Gmail works: the > message is marked important or not, and the "\Important" mailbox is a > virtual mailbox that "contains" all messages marked as important. > Eric, would you want to extend this spec to also define a message > keyword, as Cyrus suggests? Can we reuse one already used for the same purpose by Thunderbird ("$Label1")? I know it is misnamed, but it is widely deployed... From cyrus@daboo.name Thu Jan 17 12:00:49 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F10021F8949 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:00:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IgLkVfNQ87IU for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:00:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [173.13.55.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A6AF21F8AB7 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:00:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AF8B3B2D078; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:00:38 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at example.com Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (daboo.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iotpMUtw9RJ8; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:00:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from caldav.corp.apple.com (unknown [17.45.162.46]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 21C2B3B2D056; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:00:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:00:28 -0500 From: Cyrus Daboo To: Alexey Melnikov , imapext@ietf.org Message-ID: <568E3F29B79FCAA5261C4176@caldav.corp.apple.com> In-Reply-To: <50F85517.5010206@isode.com> References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2CDBE6605058EA83E82E46F3@cyrus.local> <7C9B91F6A03F17A98EAA26EC@caldav.corp.apple.com> <50F85517.5010206@isode.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; size=644 Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 20:00:50 -0000 Hi Alexey, --On January 17, 2013 at 7:46:31 PM +0000 Alexey Melnikov wrote: >> That's a good point. And that's certainly how Gmail works: the >> message is marked important or not, and the "\Important" mailbox is a >> virtual mailbox that "contains" all messages marked as important. >> Eric, would you want to extend this spec to also define a message >> keyword, as Cyrus suggests? > Can we reuse one already used for the same purpose by Thunderbird > ("$Label1")? I know it is misnamed, but it is widely deployed... What exactly does Thunderbird use that for? How is it displayed in the UI? -- Cyrus Daboo From bienvenu@davidbienvenu.org Thu Jan 17 12:08:21 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E75B121F8A56 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:08:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9dBnscCOBN1n for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:08:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from homiemail-a36.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcbef.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.145]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 251EB21F8A4A for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:08:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from homiemail-a36.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a36.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2CCE77805F for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:08:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=davidbienvenu.org; h= message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= davidbienvenu.org; bh=gLX294DGfr73k3GzMZm1vd9ZQLk=; b=ouh/trRSAA 22cs9hsIJF4pkV9liq7OTJhAmEvRYfY0ZmEqBAzj8PdrHZKOQa3x0YuJU4hbXfw7 YMphWoan6a7I40E/FnN0tTeu+Mi3rk2a/GYJTZJMcy5Vh1AR10/F1jGY0fAu61Ae VvV1zS4bpK+1LO4+pgi/nGDJiCIP6sHOI= Received: from davidbienvenu.sfo.corp.google.com (unknown [72.14.229.81]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bienvenu@davidbienvenu.org) by homiemail-a36.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B9BD377801F for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:08:14 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <50F85A2D.4060500@davidbienvenu.org> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:08:13 -0800 From: David Bienvenu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130106 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: imapext@ietf.org References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2CDBE6605058EA83E82E46F3@cyrus.local> <7C9B91F6A03F17A98EAA26EC@caldav.corp.apple.com> <50F85517.5010206@isode.com> <568E3F29B79FCAA5261C4176@caldav.corp.apple.com> In-Reply-To: <568E3F29B79FCAA5261C4176@caldav.corp.apple.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 20:08:21 -0000 It's just the keyword that Thunderbird sets on an imap message when the user tags a message as "Important". The color associated with that tag is displayed in the message list, and the tag is displayed in the message header area when displaying a message as "Tags Important". I think using \Important would be much less obscure than using $label1. - David On 01/17/2013 12:00 PM, Cyrus Daboo wrote: > Hi Alexey, > > --On January 17, 2013 at 7:46:31 PM +0000 Alexey Melnikov > wrote: > >>> That's a good point. And that's certainly how Gmail works: the >>> message is marked important or not, and the "\Important" mailbox is a >>> virtual mailbox that "contains" all messages marked as important. >>> Eric, would you want to extend this spec to also define a message >>> keyword, as Cyrus suggests? >> Can we reuse one already used for the same purpose by Thunderbird >> ("$Label1")? I know it is misnamed, but it is widely deployed... > > What exactly does Thunderbird use that for? How is it displayed in the > UI? > From barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com Thu Jan 17 12:10:40 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED4F321F84D8 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:10:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.108 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.131, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i+ht2r7IDKVJ for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:10:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vb0-f44.google.com (mail-vb0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61AFE21F8499 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:10:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vb0-f44.google.com with SMTP id fc26so2927851vbb.31 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:10:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=U6dLfZibev22iwhzleAOLbzaSIYMwgnz+6HgT68l0Ls=; b=B8X6t3UixA5PLy/GU4b23Sjn+rgAigCFRQPSeSIrZMqSnIX4ppTpSIPopmz5cNR0oD iuBEyWi6o6NnAqMcD9BtDoE2n3iB0IY4BeXOUYeTyiH+TKGntKEdtNTJFmMhc6+6Qgv7 0gGdrSwx8PhAOeyqgxMzo776cTLo8BLOJSbbdxzKDQXQBbtq9nDujAb8x09H583NkzRG E8gbfLMDGYlzQw+pGC5QMcM7NomLRA/eIy6eLSAUuZPM0y7QuB7W1xvIk3c+eoY2V72r qZA36jrAcOne5k+i08WkTfQMTEpwE0hwhMPGNX9QirEb3hROKhVHe42WI9kNTRf93853 n0sA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.67.198 with SMTP id p6mr6096496vdt.3.1358453439749; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:10:39 -0800 (PST) Sender: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com Received: by 10.59.3.41 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:10:39 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2CDBE6605058EA83E82E46F3@cyrus.local> <7C9B91F6A03F17A98EAA26EC@caldav.corp.apple.com> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:10:39 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: buyoRrR9R-Fz0kOs4nUqV80Xm8U Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: Cyrus Daboo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important@tools.ietf.org, "imapext@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 20:10:41 -0000 I've posted an -01 version that includes changes based on Alexey's comment (so please make sure I got those changes right), and which has a placeholder comment about Cyrus's suggestion. Barry From cyrus@daboo.name Thu Jan 17 13:26:37 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 447C621F88A9 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:26:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g6twFzJnYtIJ for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:26:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [173.13.55.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6C0A21F8853 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:26:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1185A3B2E28E; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:26:35 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at example.com Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (daboo.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0d0Bhy3NdtfQ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:26:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from caldav.corp.apple.com (unknown [17.45.162.46]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2747C3B2E27E; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:26:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:26:30 -0500 From: Cyrus Daboo To: Barry Leiba Message-ID: <696C0CA58B831386E12F85EE@caldav.corp.apple.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2CDBE6605058EA83E82E46F3@cyrus.local> <7C9B91F6A03F17A98EAA26EC@caldav.corp.apple.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; size=1333 Cc: draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important@tools.ietf.org, imapext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 21:26:37 -0000 Hi Barry, --On January 17, 2013 at 2:38:03 PM -0500 Barry Leiba wrote: >>> As with all special-use mailboxes, the exact meaning is >>> server-dependent. >> >> That is not true. Several flag definitions in 6154 (e.g. \Sent, \Draft) >> state that they can have special meaning to a client as well - i.e. that >> is where clients automatically store things. So, are clients allowed to >> treat \Important as a place to automatically store "important" messages? >> This touches on my point #4. > > No, that *is* true: the descriptions of \Sent and \Draft, for example > are very clear that the exact meaning is server-dependent. For > example, \Sent says this: > > Some server implementations might put messages here > automatically. Alternatively, this might just be advice that a > client save sent messages here. > > That looks server-dependent to me. If SentMail has the \Sent > attribute, a client has no idea from the description in 6154 whether > it can do "COPY 234 SentMail" or not. And it has no idea whether the > server will automatically put anything there. The description of > \Sent is just giving examples of how this is sometimes used. All I am saying is that sensible use of \Sent depends on clients agreeing on the meaning of that text too. -- Cyrus Daboo From cyrus@daboo.name Thu Jan 17 13:39:51 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA8BD21F88BE for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:39:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f1hfZ-Xppnrz for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:39:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [173.13.55.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D5E421F88BD for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:39:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB0F73B2E4D5; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:39:50 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at example.com Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (daboo.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g1epCwNSPHaO; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:39:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from caldav.corp.apple.com (unknown [17.45.162.46]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7B1633B2E4C9; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:39:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:39:46 -0500 From: Cyrus Daboo To: David Bienvenu , imapext@ietf.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <50F85A2D.4060500@davidbienvenu.org> References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2CDBE6605058EA83E82E46F3@cyrus.local> <7C9B91F6A03F17A98EAA26EC@caldav.corp.apple.com> <50F85517.5010206@isode.com> <568E3F29B79FCAA5261C4176@caldav.corp.apple.com> <50F85A2D.4060500@davidbienvenu.org> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; size=725 Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 21:39:51 -0000 Hi David, --On January 17, 2013 at 12:08:13 PM -0800 David Bienvenu wrote: > It's just the keyword that Thunderbird sets on an imap message when the > user tags a message as "Important". The color associated with that tag is > displayed in the message list, and the tag is displayed in the message > header area when displaying a message as "Tags Important". > > I think using \Important would be much less obscure than using $label1. Hrrm, I mapped the \Flagged message flag to "Important" in Mulberry's UI as I thought \Flagged was meant to indicate that. Other apps also use \Flagged but often refer to it as "Flag" for "Flagged". Does TBird use \Flagged for anything? -- Cyrus Daboo From bienvenu@davidbienvenu.org Thu Jan 17 13:44:20 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3924521F8931 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:44:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W51WD6VRQVmv for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:44:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from homiemail-a89.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcaib.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C95E221F88EA for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:44:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from homiemail-a89.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a89.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE77C3180AE for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:44:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from davidbienvenu.sfo.corp.google.com (unknown [72.14.229.81]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bienvenu@davidbienvenu.org) by homiemail-a89.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 29B37318096 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:43:07 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <50F8706A.7030802@davidbienvenu.org> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:43:06 -0800 From: David Bienvenu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130106 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: imapext@ietf.org References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2CDBE6605058EA83E82E46F3@cyrus.local> <7C9B91F6A03F17A98EAA26EC@caldav.corp.apple.com> <50F85517.5010206@isode.com> <568E3F29B79FCAA5261C4176@caldav.corp.apple.com> <50F85A2D.4060500@davidbienvenu.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 21:44:20 -0000 On 01/17/2013 01:39 PM, Cyrus Daboo wrote: > Hi David, > > --On January 17, 2013 at 12:08:13 PM -0800 David Bienvenu > wrote: > >> It's just the keyword that Thunderbird sets on an imap message when the >> user tags a message as "Important". The color associated with that >> tag is >> displayed in the message list, and the tag is displayed in the message >> header area when displaying a message as "Tags Important". >> >> I think using \Important would be much less obscure than using $label1. > > Hrrm, I mapped the \Flagged message flag to "Important" in Mulberry's > UI as I thought \Flagged was meant to indicate that. Other apps also > use \Flagged but often refer to it as "Flag" for "Flagged". Does TBird > use \Flagged for anything? > Yes, Thunderbird uses \Flagged for the starring of messages, which is a renaming of the "flag message" feature. - David From groups@maclean.com Fri Jan 18 08:38:18 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E844721F8863 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 08:38:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.495 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rkXE0ZBaCA2x for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 08:38:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from cs8-dallas.accountservergroup.com (unknown [108.174.144.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 882A421F885C for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 08:38:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from a89-152-161-30.cpe.netcabo.pt ([89.152.161.30]:53681 helo=Samsung-RF711.maclean.com) by cs8-dallas.accountservergroup.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TwExN-000DSj-Ee for imapext@ietf.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:38:17 +0000 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 11:37:10 -0500 To: "imapext@ietf.org" From: Pete Maclean In-Reply-To: References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2CDBE6605058EA83E82E46F3@cyrus.local> <7C9B91F6A03F17A98EAA26EC@caldav.corp.apple.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cs8-dallas.accountservergroup.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - maclean.com Message-Id: <20130118163818.882A421F885C@ietfa.amsl.com> Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:38:19 -0000 I am with Cyrus in that I would like to see this new flag defined a little more tightly. I have major customers who are unhappy about the lack of specificity of existing IMAP flags. For one thing, this draft, to my reading, does not make it clear enough whether the \Important flag is intended to mark a mailbox that is special in that it contains important messages and only important messages or to flag a mailbox that happens to contain some important messages along with possibly unimportant ones. My guess is that the intention is the former but, if so, I would like to see that stated. Pete Maclean At 03:10 PM 1/17/2013, Barry Leiba wrote: >I've posted an -01 version that includes changes based on Alexey's >comment (so please make sure I got those changes right), and which has >a placeholder comment about Cyrus's suggestion. > >Barry >_______________________________________________ >imapext mailing list >imapext@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext From iceman@google.com Tue Jan 22 15:46:59 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ADF721F8B13 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:46:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fi-Jz5C4tBVJ for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:46:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vc0-f202.google.com (mail-vc0-f202.google.com [209.85.220.202]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46EED21F8B06 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:46:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vc0-f202.google.com with SMTP id m8so703762vcd.1 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:46:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:message-id:date; bh=Rnto/jyQGiz2+hG/z3j9mM+qos3wQ5D9TdTDz/q2QFc=; b=D/QS9vgvpBwbJ1jLlWOmSCIS9TA0Z5ZEkc7Hq31CJyNcf7zFaNJeUXMiAMOG5j3CvM vg/IbvCagYjLWXjg3GaNzW4gYq3bvw3RScLar0wwxU7MdtP+3EXw4ZD4iRdSF2YQPhdw ytl6PXZUEm6Tnj/9a+IJ5IIekshUwmDHRNPuKy00DdBKA70P2ISW4hQ/xKwniYkmroaR 7jhwlcYRO8mu89m8cjoUCo8OYVrGoaeU40wrJ3t7samC98+D8NHRrQXGSddMUomnuy84 WLGF8UclfSlJVYOsLUvJ9AdGxexpd49WPgPyKehhG1yAfrxh1Q2L4vq3OXLGkOaowOWi rr6A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:message-id:date:x-gm-message-state; bh=Rnto/jyQGiz2+hG/z3j9mM+qos3wQ5D9TdTDz/q2QFc=; b=Utv8dLujRkbK6ASLX8kG0QW4YiT+38yt7mtUub6hB5YG3T5EDKzttORKXwDpA6IX/r N4kxwVwukGrcEnMMJDthjcvk8t9KrWu6j+W9V0Q5LRAHlMJJwUTotECZ3udLM0clsio8 ZMz1+P6Sn+SfLGfrWOnAebXpwT00C3SoH5SDWINdCSwVQJ7zy294GTjv8doW3OrkueZp 37fQaZ0MieQCwaW8MLRrtQrsxAE09qKBpUH+6vbNyeUiJOcBOsejDa1pgeKEQnEFhH83 /CZ3EjWx8alqxloBIucCGn5Zv7GhX+L5/yhP3TvTYe7vtpkIc2OHp1hHCYBEwSxpw7oo ppBQ== X-Received: by 10.236.181.34 with SMTP id k22mr5445346yhm.7.1358898417552; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:46:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from corp2gmr1-1.hot.corp.google.com (corp2gmr1-1.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.189.92]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e7si469336yhk.3.2013.01.22.15.46.57 (version=TLSv1.1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:46:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from me (moop.sfo.corp.google.com [172.31.52.216]) by corp2gmr1-1.hot.corp.google.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26BAB31C1BE; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:46:31 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <7C9B91F6A03F17A98EAA26EC@caldav.corp.apple.com> References: <20130115181839.23148.71606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2CDBE6605058EA83E82E46F3@cyrus.local> <7C9B91F6A03F17A98EAA26EC@caldav.corp.apple.com> From: To: "Barry Leiba" , "Cyrus Daboo" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Message-Id: <20130122234635.26BAB31C1BE@corp2gmr1-1.hot.corp.google.com> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:46:31 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQngxSaY7OT7gNyyX91DpbPkcy4kxwYlC8AmGW9vsyarPCbTvOZ7hqvjDpr8mjbuwOODvpy0sFCGIgTsR/2+ODL/llHjibwP3gtSCSir35VPlmoE1Qal+tIFBPfsohBma4JUizrraSYjhW0ljC8SpaCbVpU9OiKMrob1lOfP8qHtswvxhSUICn5FBbfexhG8amAZF36Q3OxsKX++GsJpvhxmW4GpCw== Cc: draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important@tools.ietf.org, "imapext@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [imapext] New Version Notification for draft-iceman-imap-specialuse-important-00.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 23:46:59 -0000 On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Barry Leiba wrote: >> I don't think there is enough detail to properly explain the intent of the >> \Important flag. > > Interesting. The detail is comparable to (actually, a bit more than) > what's in 6154 for the other special-use attributes. Perhaps you'd > wish that those were also more richly specified, but the water under > that bridge has sailed, to horribly mix some metaphors. > >> 1) Are clients allowed to set the \Important flag on a CREATE or is it >> expected that only the server manages use of this flag? > > I don't see why this is any different to any of the other special-use > attributes in that regard, nor why we'd have to say that. > >> 2) What if the flag appears on multiple mailboxes? How is the user expected >> to differentiate between the possible use cases listed in Section 2? This is >> important because there is an implication that copying messages into >> "important" mailboxes may have side-effects, and it really needs to be >> absolutely clear to the user what those might be and how those side-effects >> may differ across different \Important mailboxes. > > I don't see why this is any different to the others either. 6154 says > this about that, in general: > > In most cases, there will likely be at most one mailbox with > a given attribute for a given user, but in some server or message > store implementations it might be possible for multiple mailboxes to > have the same special-use attribute. > > Other special-use attributes have side effects as well, even if > they're not specified in 6154 (again, bridges and water, and all > that). If you copy a message in to a mailbox with the \Junk > attribute, servers might take that as an indication that it was spam > that got missed, and pass it to their spam learning engine. Messages > in a mailbox with the \Trash or \Junk attributes will probably be > auto-deleted by the server after a period of time. > > As with all special-use mailboxes, the exact meaning is server-dependent. > >> 3) The example in section 2 of users copying messages into the mailbox to >> "train" the system seems wrong. Why should a user have to duplicate (copy) >> (or perhaps move) messages around to "train" the server. Shouldn't that be >> handled by message keywords instead? i.e., a $Important flag that can be set >> on a message to tell the server to "train"? > > That's probably a good point. Eric will need to weigh in on that one, > but it might be better to remove that (and the side effect it > implies). Eric? For better or worse, the way Gmail has exposed the "Priority Inbox" in IMAP for years (in XLIST and later in SPECIAL-USE) has been via a folder with this special attribute. For Gmail, COPYing into it is something user's can do to train the system and we're obliged to keep that working. And, it seemed like a reasonable scenario to offer it an example possible way to interact with this folder for the purpose of this RFC, but, that said, I do agree with you, Cyrus, that a keyword is certainly more fitting for this particular use (and perhaps for other virtual mailboxes defined in RFC 6154). I'm certainly in agreement with adding an $Important keyword and will pass that on to the rest of the team. Eric > >> 4) What is the expected client behavior here? I am assuming that the >> expectation is that clients should show \Important mailboxes more >> prominently than non-\Important ones? > > That'd be up to the client, as with all the other mailbox special > uses. This is giving information to the client, and we're not here to > say what the UI should do with it. Similarly, RFC 3501 doesn't say > anything about what a client should do with \Marked, or, for that > matter, \Noinferiors. > > Barry From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Mon Jan 28 20:37:45 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F19C51F0D07; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:37:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.148 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.148 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.148, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_93=0.6, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jTcwxUVo6kYI; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:37:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71B731F0D06; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:37:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 5D7A6B1E002; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:26:10 -0800 (PST) To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Message-Id: <20130129042610.5D7A6B1E002@rfc-editor.org> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:26:10 -0800 (PST) Cc: imapext@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [imapext] RFC 6851 on Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP) - MOVE Extension X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 04:37:45 -0000 A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 6851 Title: Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP) - MOVE Extension Author: A. Gulbrandsen, N. Freed, Ed. Status: Standards Track Stream: IETF Date: January 2013 Mailbox: arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no, ned+ietf@mrochek.com Pages: 8 Characters: 15689 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-imapmove-command-05.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6851.txt This document defines an IMAP extension consisting of two new commands, MOVE and UID MOVE, that are used to move messages from one mailbox to another. [STANDARDS-TRACK] This document is a product of the IMAP MOVE extension Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html. For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html. Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Wed Jan 30 08:46:24 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EFBB21F886B; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 08:46:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.523 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.523 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.076, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Otg9YeiE9rws; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 08:46:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2F1421F8767; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 08:46:23 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: IESG Secretary To: IETF Announcement List X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.37 Message-ID: <20130130164623.6072.44041.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 08:46:23 -0800 Cc: alexey.melnikov@isode.com, ned.freed@mrochek.com, imapext@ietf.org Subject: [imapext] WG Action: Conclusion of IMAP MOVE extension (imapmove) X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:46:24 -0000 The IMAP MOVE extension (imapmove) working group in the Applications = Area has concluded. The IESG contact persons are Barry Leiba and Pete = Resnick. With the publication of RFC 6851 and the recording of implementation data on the working group wiki, the work of the imapmove working group is complete. With many thanks to the chairs and participants, the working group is now closed. The mailing list, which has been and continues to be used for general discussion of IMAP extensions, will remain open.