Looking for a precedent from the existing RFCs we have:
RFC3431 Sieve Extension: Relational Tests.
RFC3598 Sieve Email Filtering -- Subaddress Extension.
RFC3685 SIEVE Email Filtering: Spamtest and VirusTest Extensions.
RFC3894 Sieve Extension: Copying Without Side Effects.
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/sieve-charter.html lists the other
I-Drafts out there for Sieve and I think "Sieve Email Filtering: ..."
has
the majority vote just now.
it's odd to count unpublished drafts, IMHO. I obviously prefer the
shorter "Sieve extension". But if you're looking at them, note the
"Sieve notification" drafts -- they're not called "Sieve Email
Filtering: mailto notification mechanism" etc.
I also prefer the "Sieve Extension:" prefix. I agree the notification
drafts should also have a predictable prefix, but they seem to have that
already, so didn't bring it up. Ideally I'd like them to also have the same
prefix as the "Sieve Extension:"s, perhaps with at additional prefix after
that. However we obviously want to take care that any such prefix does not
become too long.
That means we should change these if possible:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sieve-variables
Sieve Extension: Variables
I would rather not put my name on a document which uses the misspelling
"email", which is actually an old name for "enamel". it should say
"e-mail" or just "mail".
While that might be true and I don't care much either way, it sounds like a
fruitless battle. Surely "email" is so embedded in the common consciousness
by now that it communicates the correct concept, and is that not the aim of
words?
Nigel