Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb/wrote:
> First place to start is to figure out what is actually necessary. In a
> lot of cases, POP3 with a few extensions should be perfectly adequate,
> but it is necessary to know what the needs actually are.
I don't think it's a good idea to overload the POP3, which is a last-
step _delivery_ protocol with mailbox access.
> The needs I am aware of include:
> - the basics of POP3 plus...
No, I'd rather start with IMAP, but leave out:
. the requirement that persistent IDs must be numeric and subsequent
(just use opaque strings instead),
. the very complex syntax,
. response fields that are filled in from header fields (instead pass
the header fields raw to the client),
. the variable hierarchy delimiters (instead, use iURL syntax with %-
encoding).
Some simplicifations and changes:
. Instead of namespaces, have "mailboxes" which then have certain types,
. have special folders labelled with out-of-band data for each mailbox.
I.e., don't have a folder "inbox", but an unnamed folder which has the
function inbox. Same for other commonly used folders such as sent,
templates, unsent, drafts etc. The name of that folder is left to the
UA programmers. So you would have user folders and "special" folders.
Some additional features that would be nice:
. regexp search, search for message id.
. server-side filering (optional)
. sending of email (yes!)
. Storage of metadata such as user name etc.
--
Claus Andre Faerber <http://www.faerber.muc.de>
PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
