On Tue, 2004-03-23 at 23:00, Paul Jarc wrote: > But if a particular message is inaccessible (due to wrong permissions, > or being deleted (possibly by a non-IMAP agent), etc.), then NO is > appropriate, since the server can still answer other requests, right?
"Message being deleted" case was just discussed in January (Subject: Multiple command clarification). Issuing NO isn't a very good idea, rather use NIL if you don't know the data. I'm not sure about the wrong permissions parts. OK with logging might still be the best solution for that. Or maybe you could actually want to support shared mailboxes where each message can have it's own permissions?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
