Re: [Extra] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-extra-imap-objectid-06: (with COMMENT)

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

Hi Warren,

On 30/07/2018 17:52, Warren Kumari wrote:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Thank you for writing this - I'm really not an IMAP person, but the document
> seems to me to be useful and clear.
>
> I do have a question - this is either for my education or something that needs
> fixing / clarification :-) Section 4.  MAILBOXID object identifier "The server
> SHOULD NOT change MAILBOXID when renaming a folder, as this loses the main
> benefit of having a unique identifier." All of the above things in this section
> talk about keeping the MAILBOXID the same when doing things to the *mailbox*,
> this one instead talks about *folder*; what is the difference between mailbox
> and folder? I did spend some time looking and found: "IMAP4rev1 permits
> manipulation of mailboxes (remote message folders) in a way that is
> functionally equivalent to local folders." (RFC3501) - this didn't enlighten me
> much :-) Are the terms interchangeable here? If so, I'd suggest sticking with
> one term. (Again, I'm not an IMAP person, this may all be obvious to those
> schooled in the art )
Folder and mailbox mean the same thing. RFC 3501 was using "mailbox". 
Users like to talk about "folders". I wish we can just make everybody 
use the same term, but that is not going to work ;-).
I agree that consistent terminology would be good.