Sorry, was off the list for a bit and just came back. One really simple example of a store that has \NoSelect name with children is the NNTP store. An IMAP server that exposes an NNTP hierarchy exposes comp.mail.imap even though there is no comp newsgroup - such a store has to expose comp as a \NoSelect mailbox with children.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Crispin Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 7:37 AM To: Rob Siemborski Cc: Lawrence Greenfield; IMAP protocol mailing list Subject: Re: LIST On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Rob Siemborski wrote: > I suppose this depends on your definition of harmless. I wouldn't want a > server that doesn't do this declared at all noncompliant. Agreed; there is no harm in not doing this if the server does not have have such a thing as a \NoSelect name without children. Such servers aren't noncompliant (sorry for the double negative). But we do have to consider the case when a server has \NoSelect names without children. > I do not believe it is harmless in pathological cases like LIST "*/%" > where the output could be needlessly doubled by such behavior. Of course, > this is a pathological case. I don't think that we need to consider pathological cases; a client which invoked this gets what it deserves. > Indeed, I'd argue such a server (which does not have the \NoSelect with no > children case) is equally correct with an implementation that does not > omit foo/ from the list, since none of this special treatment of trailing > hierarchy delimiters (outside of CREATE) is discussed in the protocol > specifications. That is a problem; doing so creates ambiguity and misleads clients into incorrect behavior. We should not be recklessly making IMAP more ambiguous and less useful. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum.
