A couple of observations and questions about folders and hierarchies: There are no mechanisms for manipulating hierarchies via the protocol. If I want to create or rename a folder hierarchy (eg, create a #public hierarchy), then I have to do it off-line since there is no support in the protocol directly. The largest addressable unit of data in the protocol is the folder, not the overall mailstore or its individual partitions that hold the different folders and hierarchies. Is this a weakness in the protocol, and should this support be added?
Why do so many clients use LIST at the root of the namespace? Can't everything they need to discover about that level of the namespace be found with the NAMESPACE command, and wouldn't the NAMESPACE command be more efficient for what they hope to learn? I must be missing something obvious here, since the clear preference is for LIST. -- Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/ Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/ -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- For information about this mailing list, and its archives, see: http://www.washington.edu/imap/imap-list.html -----------------------------------------------------------------
