MBOX-Line: From alexey.melnikov at isode.com  Thu Sep  8 04:07:52 2005
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:36 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] SELECT of same mailbox
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.64.0509071235060.3496@Shimo-Tomobiki.panda.com>
References: <8613FB1A1827570EC6B5150F@ninevah.cyrusoft.com>	<Pine.OSX.4.63.0509071108110.28350@pangtzu.panda.com>	<DC4E58A90D144DDA3A10024D@ninevah.cyrusoft.com>
	<Pine.WNT.4.64.0509071235060.3496@Shimo-Tomobiki.panda.com>
Message-ID: <43201B88.8060509@isode.com>

Mark Crispin wrote:

> I would not object to adding a more specific statement of the general 
> principle of BAD.

I think that would be very valuable.

> Nor would I object to adding an example that refers to and restates 
> this principle, e.g.
>     Consequently, if a mailbox is selected and a SELECT command that
>     fails is attempted, no mailbox is selected.
>
>     Note: remember that a BAD response is not a failure; it indicates
>     that the command itself was not recognized.  Therefore, a string
>     that happens to have SELECT as the second space-delimited token
>     is not a SELECT command unless it complies with the syntax of the
>     SELECT command; and if it does not comply with the syntax of the
>     SELECT command it does not cause the unselection mentioned above.
>     This applies not just to SELECT but to all commands, thus the fact
>     that a note like this doesn't appear with other commands should
>     not be construed to state that this does not apply to those other
>     comands.
>
> However, I think that doing this is silly.

A shorter version of this text would be still useful.


