Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader

Michael Haardt wrote:

> > 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.
>  
I like that.
UTF-8 to mUTF7 can be given as an informative example.

> It would fit into the general picture of Sieve that uses UTF-8 everywhere
> and relies on the implementation to convert.
>