Re: draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-01.txt

[Ken Murchison <[e-mail]>]

Barry Leiba wrote:
> 

[...]

> > 4. Are there any existing clients which implement standalone CHILDREN
> > (draft-gahrns-imap-child-mailbox), and would benefit from Cyrus
> > advertising it in addition to LISTEXT, or should any new CHILDREN
> > implementations do so only under the LISTEXT umbrella?
> 
> As CHILDREN evolved, it was actually decided NOT to advertise a capability
> string for it, because as the draft was written there was no way to ask
> for the info or not.  So a client could determine that it was supported by
> the presence of the flags.

OK, that simplifies things a little.  I'm still curious about whether
there are any clients which currently look for \Has[No]Children.  If so,
then I'll probably have LIST/LSUB always return the CHILDREN flags (they
are very inexpensive).  Otherwise, I'll leave it selectable via LISTEXT,
to reduce the number of bytes sent to the client.

Thoughts?

Ken
-- 
Kenneth Murchison     Oceana Matrix Ltd.
Software Engineer     21 Princeton Place
716-662-8973 x26      Orchard Park, NY 14127
--PGP Public Key--    http://www.oceana.com/~ken/ksm.pgp