Nigel Swinson wrote:
I remember we've discussed this before, but I don't remember the outcome
and I am offline at the moment.
Did we decide on a naming convention for Sieve extensions?
We seem to have
either "Sieve Email Filtering: ..." or "Sieve Extension: ..." and I think it
would be helpful to be consistent. Looking for a precedent from the
existing RFCs we have:
RFC3431 Sieve Extension: Relational Tests. W. Segmuller. December 2002.
(Format: TXT=12849 bytes) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)
RFC3598 Sieve Email Filtering -- Subaddress Extension. K. Murchison.
September 2003. (Format: TXT=11151 bytes) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)
RFC3685 SIEVE Email Filtering: Spamtest and VirusTest Extensions. C.
Daboo. February 2004. (Format: TXT=17436 bytes) (Status: PROPOSED
RFC3894 Sieve Extension: Copying Without Side Effects. J. Degener.
October 2004. (Format: TXT=9018 bytes) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/sieve-charter.html lists the other
I-Drafts out there for Sieve and I think "Sieve Email Filtering: ..." has
the majority vote just now. That means we should change these if possible:
Sieve Extension: Variables
Your proposal should work here.
Sieve Extension: Notifications
I can change the title, but I think that:
SIEVE Email Filtering Extension: Notifications
is slightly more informative than:
SIEVE Email Filtering: Enotify Extension
(who would know that enotify is about notifications?)
The same problem as above here: I think "Relational Tests" is more
informative that "Relational Extension"
Sieve Extension: Relational Tests