Re: [Extra] SEARCHRES / IMAP4rev2 clarifications

[Timo Sirainen <[e-mail]>]

On 13. Mar 2020, at 15.43, Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> 4) Interaction of FUZZY and SEARCHRES: SEARCH RETURN (SAVE MIN RELEVANCY)
>> 
>> Well, this is probably clear enough that RELEVANCY shouldn't affect $ results? But the FUZZY RFC doesn't specify very clearly how RELEVANCY should interact with MIN, MAX or COUNT options. Maybe it could use errata to clarify? I suppose with MIN/MAX only the one relevancy should be returned, and with COUNT all the relevancies?
> 
> We probably need to do an update at some point, but submitting errata is sensible in this case.

This is actually getting a bit confusing as well. The simple cases:

RETURN (ALL RELEVANCY) : return ALL relevancies
RETURN (MIN RELEVANCY) : return only the MIN's relevancy
RETURN (MAX RELEVANCY) : return only the MAX's relevancy
RETURN (PARTIAL n:m RELEVANCY) : return only the PARTIAL result's relevancies

The more confusing ones:

RETURN (MIN MAX RELEVANCY) : return MIN and MAX relevancies. But what if MIN=MAX, i.e. only one result? Is there 1 or 2 relevancies returned?
RETURN (MIN MAX PARTIAL n:m RELEVANCY) : Similar to above - what if MIN/MAX overlaps the PARTIAL results?
RETURN (RELEVANCY) : Maybe this should be an error?
RETURN (COUNT RELEVANCY) : Does this even make sense either?
RETURN (MIN MAX PARTIAL n:m COUNT RELEVANCY) : Should COUNT change anything?

Maybe MIN and MAX should always prepend and append the min/max relevancies, regardless of whether they overlap each others or PARTIAL. And in COUNT case I'd make it a no-op regarding RELEVANCY.