Mark Crispin wrote: > > On Fri, 10 May 2002 17:46:54 +0200, Marek Kowal wrote: > > "I do not see any reason not to have both COPY and MOVE implemented" ;-))) > > MOVE is unimplementable unless messages are stored in a method that permits > messages to be moved from one mailbox to another. IMAP explicitly does not > place such requirements upon the message store.
I must be missing something here.. Mark is providing a _reference_ implementation. Which means that to be standards compliant, your IMAP server has to meet the requirements of what the _reference_ provides. Any extensions beyond that are implementation defined, as long as the reference is maintained. > > Even if added to IMAP, a MOVE command would *not* preserve the UID (which some > people say they want). It can't; the semantics of UID preclude that. I can't say that for a reference implementation this is necessary or wanted. References are there for a reason. To show how the standard is supposed to work. If one steps beyond that, that implementor needs to be aware of the ramifications (and accountable) of their actions. Am I way off base here? -- Craig Morrison http://www.mtsprofessional.com/ A Win32 Email server that works for you.
