On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 10:59:50PM -0800, Philip Guenther wrote:
I've made one tweak for the next rev to the wording in section 2.7.1
regarding ':match' and the definition of 'character'; I had overlooked
an off-list comment at the turn of the year. The paragraph now
reads:
Sounds very good to me.
2) should 3028bis recommend/require that fileinto map UTF-8 to mUTF-7
when working with an IMAP store?
Somehow the question does not sound right to me, see below.
Implementations MAY place restrictions on
folder names; use of an invalid folder name MAY be treated as an
error or result in delivery to an implementation-defined folder.
That is a very good path between all alternatives and I like it as it
is.
Should it say more than this in either direction? I pondered adding
text about mapping UTF-8 to mUTF-7 and a supporting example (the
the open issues entry), but it couldn't find a wording that didn't
feel like one step too far beyond the scope of sieve.
I would appreciate a requirement that says: If the implementation uses
a different unicode encoding scheme than UTF-8 for folder names, it MUST
translate the folder name from UTF-8 to its encoding scheme.
It would fit into the general picture of Sieve that uses UTF-8 everywhere
and relies on the implementation to convert.
Michael