Tony Finch writes:
If you mean its "auto account setup" feature, not its horrid
autodiscover protocol, then yes but with caveats: if there are
multiple possible configurations (e.g. pop/imap, tls/clear,
smtp/submission) then I don't trust Outlook's preferences to be the
right ones to document. The choice of hostnames and ports to probe is
more likely to be reasonable.
I read this as a longwinded way of saying "what outlook does is the most
common practice, not the best".
Personally, I'd like a document saying "these are the SRV labels to use
for email, should you wish to use any" with an informative by-the-way
section saying basically "and if your SRV targets are so-and-so,
outlook will be happy". That's not ideal, but it's my preferred
compromise.
The POP/IMAP question is IMO separate.
The Thunderbird authors are nice guys (nicer than I am at any rate) and
if you suggest to them that if the best _imap._tcp SRV has better
priority than the best _pop3._tcp, tb should default to IMAP, they'll
probably do it. The Apple mail authors ditto. The Outlook authors may
be nice guys too, but I think your chance of persuading them to change
their POP vs. IMAP selection mechanism is basically zero, no matter
whether the mechanism is NAPTR, ACAP, son-of-ACAP or the SRV hack
above.
Arnt