[Top] [All Lists]

Re: List of issues with Sieve notifications

2005-10-19 06:44:25

On Wed, 2005-10-19 at 13:21 +0200, Michael Haardt wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 11:15:53PM +0200, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
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.

Putting options in the method spec is bad, because basically it
introduces overloading.  Suddenly, a parser could not detect
errors on unknown options when parsing the notify arguments, but
first must parse all options, and then semantic analysis has to
find out if there is a signature for them.

Say you have two methods:

"sms", which offers the option "route" to specify the route
"mailto", which offers the option "from" to specify the sender

What's the error message on:

  notify :from "sender(_at_)example(_dot_)com" :method "sms:0123456789" ;

It is: No matching option signature.  Now that's an error users are
really going to hate.

no, the argument to :method is a structured value, so we can trivially
know that if :method "foo:whatever" exists without a require
"notify-foo", it's an error.  this is similar to the requirements for

Kjetil T.