MBOX-Line: From brong at fastmail.fm  Mon Nov 14 14:36:49 2011
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmail.fm>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:47 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] SELECT/EXAMINE clarification of UNSEEN
In-Reply-To: <4EC18E1D.10652.EB3C6B5@David.Harris.pmail.gen.nz>
References: <C61A1BDF-03DD-4ED9-BFCA-C6183F07DD3E@mac.com>,
	<20111114205919.GA5573@brong.net>,
	<20111114210927.GA6194@brong.net>
	<4EC18E1D.10652.EB3C6B5@David.Harris.pmail.gen.nz>
Message-ID: <1321310209.23714.140660998907545@webmail.messagingengine.com>



On Tuesday, November 15, 2011 10:54 AM, "David Harris" <David.Harris@pmail.gen.nz> wrote:
> On 14 Nov 2011 at 22:09, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> 
> > >                      SEARCH command if it wants to find it.  If there are
> > >                      no unseen messages in the mailbox, it is not possible
> > >                      to produce a sensible UNSEEN value, so servers MUST
> > >                      omit this item.
> 
> Could I suggest that this might be rendered more simply:
> 
> "If there are no unseen messages in the mailbox, the UNSEEN 
> response MUST be omitted, otherwise it MUST be sent."

That's really good.  You could probably even remove some negatives.  Hmm.

If there are any unseen messages in the mailbox, an UNSEEN response must
be sent, if not it MUST be omitted.

What do you think?

Bron.
-- 
  Bron Gondwana
  brong@fastmail.fm


