Hi,
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:58:00 -0800, Tim Showalter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote...
Mark Crispin wrote:
Am I correct in believing that we have concensus in recommending that,
giving a hierarchy delimiter of /, that
tag LIST a/b c/d
SHOULD resolve to a/b/c/d or a/c/d, but not a/bc/d?
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, David Woodhouse wrote:
H.. Can we then have a \Subscribed flag too?
That would require that all subscribed mailboxes exist.
Or is there another way of finding out which folders are subscribed
other than separately issuing LIST and LSUB commands?
No.
-- Mark --
On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 10:36 -0800, Mark Crispin wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, David Woodhouse wrote:
H.. Can we then have a \Subscribed flag too?
That would require that all subscribed mailboxes exist.
Not really.
Or is there another way of finding out which folders are subscribed
On 13 Jan 2004 at 10:36, Mark Crispin wrote:
H.. Can we then have a \Subscribed flag too?
That would require that all subscribed mailboxes exist.
Why? To me it simply suggests that all existing mailboxes that are
subscribed could report that fact via LIST.
Since I'm doing a lot of
On 02 Jan 2004, at 2:28 PM, Mark Crispin wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004, Christof Drescher wrote:
RFC 2180 is informational. It is not standards-track. In part, RFC
2180 has been overtaken by events.
I'm willing to learn. What events?
The past 6.5 years of implementation history.
This goes to a
