MBOX-Line: From arnt at gulbrandsen.priv.no  Fri Aug  4 00:35:20 2006
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:37 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] IMAP/Pine List query
In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSX.4.64.0608030959370.408@pangtzu.panda.com>
References: <089601c6b713$60732ba0$8710e0c3@ftgate.lan>
	<Pine.OSX.4.64.0608030959370.408@pangtzu.panda.com>
Message-ID: <o+GFt9OdDmUlaEfxQJuG6Q.md5@libertango.oryx.com>

Mark Crispin writes:
> Are you saying that your mail store does not have INBOX?  /inbox is 
> not equivalent to INBOX.
>
> Or are you saying that your mail store has INBOX, but does not respond 
> with any data to the command
>        tag LIST INBOX %
> If so, it should; that command matches INBOX.

RFC 3501, page 41, says this on the subject:

            If the reference argument is not a level of mailbox
            hierarchy (that is, it is a \NoInferiors name), and/or
            the reference argument does not end with the hierarchy
            delimiter, it is implementation-dependent how this is
            interpreted.  For example, a reference of "foo/bar" and
            mailbox name of "rag/baz" could be interpreted as
            "foo/bar/rag/baz", "foo/barrag/baz", or "foo/rag/baz".

Pine's reference name does not end with a hierarchy separator and 
Richard's server's empty response fits two of the three explicitly 
sanctioned possibilities. Sounds OK to me.

As for pine, it is a client and page 41 continues:

            A client SHOULD NOT use such a reference argument except
            at the explicit request of the user.

(I'll reply to your other email later.)

Arnt

