MBOX-Line: From tss at iki.fi  Fri May 20 15:00:43 2011
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Timo Sirainen <tss@iki.fi>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:46 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] Thoughts on keyword improvements/enhancements
In-Reply-To: <20110520214340.GA1097@brong.net>
References: <20110518210716.GA12636@brong.net>
	<alpine.OSX.2.00.1105181519330.24932@hsinghsing.panda.com>
	<20110519045851.GA23466@brong.net>
	<alpine.OSX.2.00.1105182203320.24932@hsinghsing.panda.com>
	<20110519220352.GA12141@brong.net>
	<alpine.OSX.2.00.1105191513210.24932@hsinghsing.panda.com>
	<20110520002607.Horde.lf1bSoF5lbhN1gl-aoNHDLA@bigworm.curecanti.org>
	<1305883385.10421.294.camel@hurina>
	<20110520121957.Horde.chpUaIF5lbhN1rDN6FN3DTA@bigworm.curecanti.org>
	<1305918054.10421.369.camel@hurina>
	<20110520214340.GA1097@brong.net>
Message-ID: <98F27C33-0A6C-4320-B983-C4B8EAB9D0A6@iki.fi>

On 21.5.2011, at 0.43, Bron Gondwana wrote:

> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:00:54PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>> Not having an explicit keyword/label separation would make this easy for
>> servers to implement it (and clients too, I'd think!). All I'd have to
>> do is remove some restrictions and add a bit of code to show a keyword
>> only if it's a valid atom or if utf8-keywords is ENABLEd.
> 
> You haven't addressed the case of "STORE FLAGS" (not +FLAGS) here, where
> you would have to decide if you implicitly clear a flag based on the
> ENABLE command.  That adds more complexity to the server.
> 
> Bron ( of course, few clients actually do that )

Hmm. Yeah. I've never really liked that command. Internally in Dovecot I have only +flags/keywords, -flags/keywords and "remove all keywords". I wonder what the real use cases for STORE FLAGS is? Probably mainly syncing client's local state to server. For that if the client doesn't understand UTF-8 keywords, it probably shouldn't be touching them either. But yes, that makes my code at least more complex, requiring yet another "remote all atom keywords" command.


