On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Barry Leiba
I agree that it'd be better to put it into the variables spec. You
know I'm not suggesting going through everything to say where you can
and can't do variable substitution; you should know me better than
that. But Hannah has a point: the variables spec says this:
This extension changes the semantics of quoted-string, multi-line-
literal and multi-line-dotstuff found in [SIEVE] to enable the
inclusion of the value of variables.
...and the grammar for "importance" uses none of those three syntax
constructions. Taken at its word, that would imply that variable
substitution doesn't apply here.
I am fine with this being reported as an Erratum. Do you want to do that?
We might change RFC 5229 to add that
variables can substitute for literal strings as well. Or we might
decide that it's clear enough, and doesn't need changing.
sieve mailing list