MBOX-Line: From dave at cridland.net  Mon Oct 29 15:39:41 2007
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:40 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] Re: [Alpine-alpha] Gmail + Alpine + IMAP keywords
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSO.4.64.0710291509500.22314@vanye.mho.net>
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>
	<alpine.WNT.0.9999.0710291354570.3152@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washignton.EDU>
	<Pine.BSO.4.64.0710291509500.22314@vanye.mho.net>
Message-ID: <1040.1193697581.624584@peirce.dave.cridland.net>

On Mon Oct 29 21:18:25 2007, Philip Guenther wrote:
> The characters in atom-specials can't be included directly in flag  
> names and they can't be encoded in modified-UTF-7, so simply saying  
> "flag names should be interpreted as being in modified-UTF-7" would  
> not be sufficient to let gmail represent all possible label names.

An alternative would be a standard mechanism for descriptive names of  
keywords, which a clever client could then use in lieu of the atoms  
in its UI. Clients could then query the server for the human-readable  
label for the keyword - everything is, of course, soluble given an  
additional layer of indirection.

I'm not saying I prefer this, but it might be easier to go this  
route, and it doesn't preclude a UTF-8 variant of the FLAGS fetch  
item from using this directly in the future.

Dave.
-- 
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave@cridland.net - xmpp:dwd@jabber.org
  - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
  - http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade

