Mark Crispin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > RFC 3501, section 6.4.5, page 54: > Most data items, identified in the formal syntax under the > msg-att-static rule, are static and MUST NOT change for any > particular message. Other data items, identified in the formal > syntax under the msg-att-dynamic rule, MAY change, either as a > result of a STORE command or due to external events.
So if the server at one time gives a value for a particular static data item, and at a later time does not give a value at all, not even NIL, then you call this a change of the data item? That isn't at all clear to me from the text of the RFC. > This specifically outlaws the scenarios of: > a1 FETCH 1 RFC822.TEXT > * 1 FETCH RFC822.TEXT "foo" > a1 OK done! > a2 FETCH 1 RFC822.TEXT > * 1 FETCH RFC822.TEXT NIL > a2 OK done! I agree on this one. > You have been saying in several messages, that you are right in your > intepretation of IMAP, and that I am wrong. More precisely, I am saying that the text of RFC3501 does not make it clear to me that the options you give (hold on to the message or drop the connection) are the only possible ones. I am not saying that dropping the connection would violate the RFC. > If I were to change the document to declare a wrong interpretation to be the > only right one, you would scream foul -- and with good reason! If you changed it to mean something *incompatible* with what it currently seems to mean, then yes. But if what I just said above is indeed the intent of RFC3501, then I'd say this is vagueness that ought to be nailed down more precisely in the future. paul
