[Imap-protocol] re: GMail

[Tim Showalter]

Mark Crispin wrote:

> I think that there is much more opposition to adding to a base 

> specification than to a service level.  A new base specification 

> purported kills the previous one; whereas a service level might get 

> ignored at a particular point.

> 

> Sometimes how you call things does matter!


Well, I think that's true, but it's clear that base specifications get 
ignored, too.

I don't have a feel for which is the easier path, but I am fearful of 
the work involved in IMAP5, because I think it will bring out the trolls.

If we were to add a single client-side capability, we could provide a 
general mechanism.  I think it's desirable if we encourage client 
capabilities to be bundled, but I think requiring it is a mistake.

I don't believe IMAP5 would provide this flexibility.

Tim