MBOX-Line: From MRC at CAC.Washington.EDU  Mon Oct 29 13:59:00 2007
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:40 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] Re: [Alpine-alpha] Gmail + Alpine + IMAP keywords
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.0.9999.0710291518340.25694@transport>
References: <alpine.OSX.0.999.0710291754160.1034@f-pbzchgre-2.ybpny>
	<alpine.LNX.0.9999.0710291442060.25694@transport>
	<alpine.LNX.0.9999.0710291502100.25694@transport>
	<alpine.LNX.0.9999.0710291518340.25694@transport>
Message-ID: <alpine.WNT.0.9999.0710291354570.3152@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washignton.EDU>

[Adding imap-protocol]

On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
> As for flags, though, they seem to work fine via raw IMAP [see log below], 
> but I think the FLAGS response:
>
> * FLAGS (\Answered \Flagged \Draft \Deleted \Seen \*)
> * OK [PERMANENTFLAGS (\Flagged \Draft \Deleted \Seen \*)]
>
> section of the SELECT response is broken. ("\*" shouldn't be in FLAGS, should 
> it?

Yes, that's definitely a bug.

> Would that prevent Alpine from interpreting "\*" in PERMANENTFLAGS as a 
> wildcard [since it's already been listed in FLAGS])

Fortunately, although \* is indeed invalid in FLAGS, Alpine ignores it 
entirely.

> Flags don't do anything via Gmail's interface, though. Gmail labels are 
> indeed done via virtual folders. Creating "[Gmail]/TestFlagFolder" even made 
> a bizarre "[Gmail]/TestFlagFolder" label.

Yeah, I think that Gmail got themselves into a worse swamp by implementing 
labels as mailboxes than if they had followed the straight and narrow and 
used keywords.  I'm still trying to convince them to change their minds; 
and to make this viable, IMHO, the IMAP protocol community should 
immediately agree that keywords can use Modified-UTF7 and push for UTF-8 
in keywords and flags.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

