Re: [ietf-smtp] Fwd: Request to form a new WG: JMAP

John C Klensin writes:
> But, unless we can get rid of IMAP (and some of the
> functionality, like disconnected mode, that can't obviously be
> supported over a purely HTTPS/JSON interface) entirely, it seems
> to me that an HTTPS/JOSN approach is additive, requiring the
> mail environment to support both it and IMAP for (at least) a
> very long time.

Not at all. There are many, many clients that serve a very small audience 
and need only one protocol.

It has been mentioned on this list that a two-digit number of clients 
account for >99% of people's usage, and at another time that around a 
thousand different clients used a particular IMAP extension on a particular 
day at gmail. That's quite a difference, and my guess is that a big part of 
that is programs that implement someone's business logic and act on at most 
a handful of mail accounts. Those programs need to be simple to write.

Arnt

_______________________________________________
imapext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext