Re: Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension-08: (with COMMENT)
Jayantheesh S B <[email protected]> Thu, 7 Jan 2016 16:04:19 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.imapext |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Dear SM, Yes, both text refers to the same examples in Section 2. Regards, Jay -----Original Message----- From: imapext [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of S Moonesamy Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 6:40 PM To: Narendra Singh Bisht; Jayantheesh S B Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [imapext] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension-08: (with COMMENT) Hi Naren, Jay, At 15:15 06-01-2016, Ben Campbell wrote: >The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extens >ion/ > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >COMMENT: >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >- section 2, last paragraph: > >It was not obvious to me if "An IMAP client SHOULD be able to parse >both formats. " meant both STATUS and LIST, or both global and >per-mailbox. I assume the former. In the first paragraph of Section 2 there is the following: "An IMAP server can publish the APPENDLIMIT capability in two formats." There are then two examples of the formats. In the last paragraph of Section 2 there is: "An IMAP client SHOULD be able to parse both formats." Does that refer to the two examples in Section 2? Regards, S. Moonesamy (as document shepherd) _______________________________________________ imapext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext _______________________________________________ imapext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext