On Thu, 13 Mar 2003, Eric Luyten wrote: > >From my visits to comp.mail.imap I remember this ongoing "standard > violation" discussion stems from the fact that there are essentially > two IMAP server/client implementation schools who interpret a number > of (acknowledged) RFC text incoherencies in different ways
In that case, the correct thing to do is to fix the RFC, not to have holy wars about varying interpretation by the clients. > producing one server/clients set that works fine and another one which > does equally fine, but you're more or less guaranteed to run into > trouble when you mix them and use any of the disputed features. I had noticed that squirrelmail allows admins to select which of 4 imap servers was being used, but that was mostly explained away by the local storage format. Hopefully it won't take 20 years to produce fixups.(*) (*)RFC821/822 -> 2821/2822 (*)RFC1036 -> still-unofficial-but-used-as-canonical-anyway son-of-rfc1036 AB
