[Top] [All Lists]

Re: List of issues with Sieve notifications

2005-10-18 14:30:51

On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 21:00 +0200, Michael Haardt wrote:
I see a bunch possible approaches:

o  Invent new generic options that cover all methods and each method
   picks the options it understands and ignores the rest.  This extends
   URIs in an invisible way, but having the options in the notify spec
   is a problem if a new scheme needs more.  Putting them in the method
   specs sounds very bad to me.

why is putting them in the method spec bad?  adding syntax elements does
mean we need an extension for each method, e.g., require "notify-sms",
but I don't think that is a bad thing at all.  it means the user will
have a way of knowing which notification methods are supported,
something he can't do today.

this would also solve item 1 on Alexey's list ("Need to change the
extension name") :-)
Kjetil T.