Re: [Imap-protocol] Email charset statistics
Arnt Gulbrandsen <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.imap.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 10:07:45 PM CEST, Brandon Long wrote: > Didn't remember the exact rfc and did a quick search to find > it. Yes, I meant 6855... which really could use more > information on how its different from 5738, as I look at both > right now. 6855 just says it obsoletes 5738. I suppose it could do with a bit more. 6855 started as 5738 with a random smattering of improvements (I didn't pay attention at the start). Then I tried to implement it and protested against various brain damage, and in one quick jabber session, 5738bis lost every feature I hated. I was so surprised that I'm not sure I remembered to mention everything. Then Dave Cridland suggested better quoting, and then the RFC was published. What badness do you see in 6855? Arnt _______________________________________________ Imap-protocol mailing list [email protected] http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-protocol