Re: [Extra] Call for adoption, draft-gondwana-sieve-mailboxid

[Ned Freed <[e-mail]>]

> On 08/11/2018 02:55 PM, Ned Freed wrote:
> >> This extension can probably interact with :fcc.
> >
> > Definitely.
> >
> >>   Should the interop be
> >> described in this draft of the :fcc draft?
> >
> > Why not have it build on the :fcc draft instead of creating a dependency
> > in the other direction?

> Agreed.



> >> Additionally, the :mailboxid argument probably doesn't play well with
> >> :create, or at least I don't see how it could without a mailbox name.
> >
> > Not sure I see the conflict. Of course you can't create a mailbox
> > with the specified objectid, but in the fallback case :create would
> > still be valid.
> >
> > It just needs to be spelled out in the document.

> :create wouldn't have a mailbox name to use if :mailboxid is specified. 
> :mailboxid changes the positional parameter in fileinto from a name to
> an id (unless I'm reading it incorrectly).

Missed that, sorry.

I'm not sure I agree with this approach. Why not use the :specialuse
approach instead, where :specialuse takes an argument specifying the
specialuse mailbox and if it doesn't exist then the regular fileinto
argument is used instead.

Wouldn't a similar semantic make sense for objectid in the event
that the folder with the specified objectid is gone?

				Ned