Keith Moore writes:
Entirely agree with John and Ned, and would go even further:
This project should absolutely not be taken on unless either
a) it's very narrowly scoped (much more narrow than the
description seemed to imply) OR
b) it's such a good proposal that we'd feel comfortable
deprecating one or more existing and widely-used standard email
protocols
Both of the protocols I've read are wider scoped, and IMO better.
IMO the last thing we need is Yet Another Mail Access protocol
that user agents need to support, and we might well be better
off deprecating one of the ones we have.
Stack Overflow is a nice indicator of developer interest and activity... as
I read it, gmail's REST/JSON API has overtaken POP already and is
overtaking IMAP for custom-written scripts. IMAP dominates for general
MUAs.
POP looks like a good candidate for historic status.
I'm not a huge fan of IMAP and it's looking pretty baroque by
now, and POP is so dysfunctional and ill-suited to mobile
devices that phasing it out would make sense. And a completely
new protocol might actually be a good idea. But *-over-HTTPS
is almost certainly going to be worse than any of the above.
Do you mean as a general statement, or are you saying that either
fastmail's or gmail's REST/JSON APIs are worse than either IMAP or POP?
https://developers.google.com/gmail/api/guides/
https://blog.fastmail.com/2014/12/23/jmap-a-better-way-to-email/
Arnt
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp