On Mon, 3 Jun 2002, Lawrence Greenfield wrote: > The normative part of the references: > [IMAP-IMPLEMENTATION] Leiba, B. "IMAP Implementation > Recommendations", RFC 2683, September 1999. > [IMAP-MULTIACCESS] Gahrns, M. "IMAP4 Multi-Accessed Mailbox > Practice", RFC 2180, July 1997. > both of which are informational RFCs. This seems strange to me.
Well, I don't know what to do here. The information in these two documents is very important to writing an interoperable implementation; we've all agreed that the information in these documents is important. If they are not in the normative section, then they are likely to be unread (and worse, defied). A simple reading of a certain thread in comp.mail.imap sufficies to show what can happen. Granted that *** is an idiot, but why give such people more ammunition. Nevertheless, I'll go with whatever group concensus says. Also, perhaps some of those references need to be updated. That's why I sent it as email to the IMAP list instead of submitting it as an I-D. I want you folks to review it first, and as soon as possible since we're coming close to an I-D submission deadline. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
