Re: Protocol Action: 'INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - SORT AND THREAD EXTENSIONS' to Proposed Standard

[Mark Crispin <[e-mail]>]

The author of the document(s) in question hereby states his complete lack 
of concern as to whether the title of the published RFC is uppercase or 
titlecase.  He was doing nothing other than following past precedents; and 
those precedents that he used were all uppercase.

Of greater concern to the author is the BLOBCHAR/NONWSP issue.  I have 
already contacted Chris Newman on this matter.  This change can be 
interpreted as imposing a mandate on IMAP server implementations that does 
not currently exist; arguably conflicts with RFC 5051; and in real life is 
moot due to external specifications (RFC 2822 among others).  Due to the 
last point, a string that triggers this rule is an invalid string.

With Chris' permission, I request that this particular RFC Editor note 
either be waived or be made as a documentation suggestion only.

On Thu, 3 Apr 2008, Russ Housley wrote:
>
> See RFC 3501
>
> At 05:27 PM 4/3/2008, Bob Braden wrote:
>
>
>>   *> The IESG has approved the following document:
>>   *>
>>   *> - 'INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - SORT AND THREAD EXTENSIONS '
>>   *>    <draft-ietf-imapext-sort-20.txt> as a Proposed Standard
>>   *>
>> 
>> Why is this document shouting at us?  Title case is the norm for
>> RFCs.
>> 
>> RFC Editor/bb
>>
>>  *> Two simple/optional improvements:
>>   *> Add a normative reference to STD 63 (RFC3629) for UTF-8.
>>   *> Instead of allowing any 8-bit in BLOBCHAR and NONWSP, reference the 
>> rules
>>   *> in RFC 3629 for well-formed UTF-8 (UTF8-2, UTF8-3, UTF8-4).
>>   *>
>
>

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.