On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 14:58:15 +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Would it improve the standard to make this more obvious? The text
> that the argument is based on is located inside parentheses in a
> comment inside the ABNF without saying how to handle the error or why
> it is an error.
Well, sections 5.5 and 7.4.1 don't do that; they simply explain that it is
alright for it to be an error.
Here's my latest stab at the rule for seq-number. I hope this is clearer?
seq-number = nz-number / "*"
; message sequence number (COPY, FETCH, STORE
; commands) or unique identifier (UID COPY,
; UID FETCH, UID STORE commands).
; * represents the largest number in use. In
; the case of message sequence numbers, it is
; the number of messages in a non-empty mailbox.
; In the case of unique identifiers, it is the
; unique identifier of the last message in the
; mailbox or, if the mailbox is empty, the
; UIDNEXT value.
; The server should respond with a tagged BAD
; response to a command that uses a message
; sequence number greater than the number of
; messages in the selected mailbox. This
; includes "*" if the selected mailbox is empty.
