MBOX-Line: From davidr at imap.cc  Sun Jul 12 16:51:06 2009
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: David Rauschenbach <davidr@imap.cc>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:42 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] off-topic: stats on mail duplication, mailing
	list sizes, etc?
In-Reply-To: <98779.1247438465@parc.com>
References: <97903.1247435045@parc.com> <4A5A5CA5.6020709@imap.cc>
	<98779.1247438465@parc.com>
Message-ID: <4A5A76EA.2030708@imap.cc>

Ah yes, Wave, the new e-mail protocol now being specified by the 
internet's leading marketing & spyware company. Times 'a changin'. Or, 
maybe not at all different from the D.O.J. roots of it all, considering 
the definition of corporatism, and that they're one and the same.

The Wave video demo is pretty good - I'm sure it will do well. As for my 
role in things... the legacy protocols will still be the best way to 
push content out to phones, and in that regard, IMAP has that very 
useful disconnected mode, whereas Wave looks like it's for broadband 
tethered devices only. In other words, pro-sumer Americans who never 
travel abroad (the subset of the subset, globally speaking). Or, "the 
bankrupt subset" might be the more distinct moniker for the next decade.

I suppose Wave might get a disconnected mode shoe-horned in there late, 
like an etag extension. It's easy to forget UIDPLUS was even late to the 
IMAP party.

David



Bill Janssen wrote:
> David Rauschenbach <davidr@imap.cc> wrote:
>
>   
>> In a MIME store, lots of people forward the same attachment, but in
>> each case, the part header as different headers. Some MUAs use a
>> content-type "name" attribute field-param to store the file name,
>> others use the Content-Disposition "filename" field-param, etc. But in
>> both cases, you really want to store the 15 MB zip file attachment
>> just once.
>>     
>
> Yes, I should really do that, too.  I'm close already; attachments are
> stored as separate UpLib documents, with pointers to that document in
> the message.  But the pointers are document IDs, not document
> fingerprints, so duplicates are possible.
>
>   
>> As for what is profitable, I think Facebook, Twitter, et. al. are
>> successfully demonstrating that, en-masse, communication is routing
>> around the dinosaur e-mail protocols. Techies like us (especially the
>> older and the entrenched) are usually the last to wake up to the new
>> reality.
>>     
>
> Perhaps.  I'm already thinking about a Google Wave server for UpLib.
>
> Bill
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/pipermail/imap-protocol/attachments/20090712/87d5edab/attachment.html>
