MBOX-Line: From arnt at gulbrandsen.priv.no  Tue Apr 11 02:45:29 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] Re: LIST Clarification
In-Reply-To: <20060411082634.GB23615@fone>
References: <443A7A2D.2070708@consilient.com> <web-35034698@mail.stalker.com>
	<Pine.OSX.4.64.0604101053530.2906@pangtzu.panda.com>
	<web-35035906@mail.stalker.com>
	<Pine.WNT.4.65.0604101441160.4904@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>
	<20060411082634.GB23615@fone>
Message-ID: <V/XtcajgI1zbICUGR4NgMQ.md5@libertango.oryx.com>

Ingo Schurr writes:
> This might be implementation-dependent, but IMHO any implementation 
> choosing to see 4 mailboxes in the example above will create some 
> problems.

Been there, accidentally done that, you're absolutely right. Down that 
path lies madness

> Therefore I strongly vote for clarifying this case in the RFC. Not the 
> _word_ INBOX should be special, but the hierarchical name.

And what about the actual inbox? Suppose your INBOX is also available as 
"Other Users.ingo.INBOX", as it might be on some server? (Was it 
cyrus?) In that case, are "Other Users" and "ingo" case sensitive, 
while "INBOX" is not? Given the following six commands, which should 
succeed?

a CREATE "Other users.ingo.inbox.a"
b CREATE "Other user.inbo.inbox.A"
c CREATE "Other users.ingo.INBOX.a"
d CREATE INBOX.A
e CREATE inbox.B
f CREATE inbox.b

I don't really care, I just wanted to point it out ;)

Arnt

