mailing list archives

Hmm looks like GMail now supports the SPECIAL-USE LIST extension (rfc6154)
in addition to their own XLIST command:

3 list "/" "*"
* LIST (\HasNoChildren) "/" "INBOX"
* LIST (\HasNoChildren) "/" "Personal"
* LIST (\HasNoChildren) "/" "Receipts"
* LIST (\HasNoChildren) "/" "Travel"
* LIST (\HasNoChildren) "/" "Work"
* LIST (\Noselect \HasChildren) "/" "[Gmail]"
* LIST (\HasNoChildren \All) "/" "[Gmail]/All Mail"
* LIST (\HasNoChildren \Drafts) "/" "[Gmail]/Drafts"
* LIST (\HasNoChildren \Important) "/" "[Gmail]/Important"
* LIST (\HasNoChildren \Sent) "/" "[Gmail]/Sent Mail"
* LIST (\HasNoChildren \Junk) "/" "[Gmail]/Spam"
* LIST (\HasNoChildren \Flagged) "/" "[Gmail]/Starred"
* LIST (\HasNoChildren \Trash) "/" "[Gmail]/Trash"

// John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/pipermail/imap-protocol/attachments/20121010/134d7b3e/attachment.html>

On 11.10.2012, at 1.27, John Galton wrote:

> Hmm looks like GMail now supports the SPECIAL-USE LIST extension (rfc6154) in addition to their own XLIST command:

Although the SPECIAL-USE capability itself isn't advertised.

RFC 6154 is "theirs" as well considering the authors.  ;-)  Section 2 does say this.
There is no capability string related to the support of special-use attributes on the non-extended LIST command.

So it seems right that there's no advertised capability.

Ian

On Oct 10, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Timo Sirainen <tss@iki.fi> wrote:

> On 11.10.2012, at 1.27, John Galton wrote:
> 
>> Hmm looks like GMail now supports the SPECIAL-USE LIST extension (rfc6154) in addition to their own XLIST command:
> 
> Although the SPECIAL-USE capability itself isn't advertised.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Imap-protocol mailing list
> Imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
> http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-protocol
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4383 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/pipermail/imap-protocol/attachments/20121010/e7c4a25f/attachment.p7s>

For those keeping track at home, we had to revert this because a minor
phone client wasn't able to handle the extended syntax, hard coding a small
set of acceptable list-flags.  We'll probably re-enable it as soon as they
have a fix.

Brandon

On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Ian Anderson <iana@apple.com> wrote:

> RFC 6154 is "theirs" as well considering the authors.  ;-)  Section 2 does
> say this.
> There is no capability string related to the support of special-use
> attributes on the non-extended LIST command.
>
> So it seems right that there's no advertised capability.
>
> Ian
>
> On Oct 10, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Timo Sirainen <tss@iki.fi> wrote:
>
> > On 11.10.2012, at 1.27, John Galton wrote:
> >
> >> Hmm looks like GMail now supports the SPECIAL-USE LIST extension
> (rfc6154) in addition to their own XLIST command:
> >
> > Although the SPECIAL-USE capability itself isn't advertised.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Imap-protocol mailing list
> > Imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
> > http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-protocol
>
> _______________________________________________
> Imap-protocol mailing list
> Imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
> http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-protocol
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/pipermail/imap-protocol/attachments/20121015/1c863965/attachment.html>

On 10/15/12 22:45, Brandon Long wrote:
> For those keeping track at home, we had to revert this because a minor
> phone client wasn't able to handle the extended syntax, hard coding a
> small set of acceptable list-flags.  We'll probably re-enable it as soon
> as they have a fix.

I assume you are not likely to name the vendor in question. I was 
wondering what the engineering reason for refusing to accept unknown 
list flags might be...

With kind regards
Jan

-- 
Trojita, a fast e-mail client -- http://trojita.flaska.net/

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 4:49 AM, Jan Kundr?t <jkt@flaska.net> wrote:

> On 10/15/12 22:45, Brandon Long wrote:
>
>> For those keeping track at home, we had to revert this because a minor
>> phone client wasn't able to handle the extended syntax, hard coding a
>> small set of acceptable list-flags.  We'll probably re-enable it as soon
>> as they have a fix.
>>
>
> I assume you are not likely to name the vendor in question. I was
> wondering what the engineering reason for refusing to accept unknown list
> flags might be...
>

Someone made an easy mistake?  Unless you pay close attention to the RFC
EBNF, its probably easy to make that mistake.

They haven't shared with me their reasoning.  Or their planned fix, though
I did point out that section of the EBNF to them, so hopefully they will
fix it the right way instead of just adding the SPECIAL-USE flags to their
supported list.

Brandon


>
> With kind regards
> Jan
>
> --
> Trojita, a fast e-mail client -- http://trojita.flaska.net/
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Imap-protocol mailing list
> Imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
> http://mailman2.u.washington.**edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-**protocol<http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-protocol>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/pipermail/imap-protocol/attachments/20121016/e69da0d1/attachment.html>