IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Jmap] Adding the Message::isForwarded property

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Wed, 19 April 2017 07:27 UTC

Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
X-Original-To: jmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4AAD131537 for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 00:27:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isode.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oDNdfGoO__i2 for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 00:27:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from waldorf.isode.com (waldorf.isode.com [62.232.206.188]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA3B2131532 for <jmap@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 00:27:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1492586844; d=isode.com; s=june2016; i=@isode.com; bh=UTK44ZGPCKn4qv92oROh1lTTFRm1UeGRjOQYQj0SBQM=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=wfkQAc9SpAolADDA01eYbm1GgWo+PmPCuhrtO5hQCD1++Ds5fHornRws9QoMD5flrQ4jj1 2lankncNhoruz45SVQ8171/sq6LRZjwpD0xX0mWxobcJ52dlNI3EVbIlaad6oO0m+QtT0w 7FbE7MOj2OX7XIIrlzRoWyMhcKr/sn8=;
Received: from [10.1.127.18] ((unknown) [85.255.234.109]) by waldorf.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id <WPcRWgB2XbDR@waldorf.isode.com>; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 08:27:24 +0100
X-SMTP-Protocol-Errors: NORDNS PIPELINING
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (13G35)
In-Reply-To: <em0221408d-35e4-4706-b2b7-246c06e3b592@bodybag>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 08:42:35 +0100
Cc: "jmap@ietf.org" <jmap@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <6799E58E-E92D-45F3-A475-FBBD01CC8DED@isode.com>
References: <148716911729.17277.15371202023742081890.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <b7ec34d3-3aaf-82af-3663-5b0966c83ff0@dcrocker.net> <b5753f7f-92f9-50dd-42f0-ce0de7360e08@linagora.com> <A9EDBE7D-4E3D-45C2-BB97-F74AC9DB9486@oracle.com> <9eb1fd3c-8868-9d24-6c30-46d333b69fef@isode.com> <3c1711a2-46dd-db1c-506e-5e1ad89ce56d@linagora.com> <92769755-62c6-7257-ce3d-7d0b5699735d@isode.com> <27c62cc8-68e0-49b5-4900-34c26d7b4c6a@linagora.com> <C88A669A-2143-4FC2-81EF-3C9A2CD5963B@apple.com> <D0072AC9-71DC-4831-A3DA-FEA4A7B85BBA@oracle.com> <AB5279CE-4F9A-4DE8-AEEA-E1425D04FA89@att.com> <1492581452.3025596.948906456.71780673@webmail.messagingengine.com> <em0221408d-35e4-4706-b2b7-246c06e3b592@bodybag>
To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jmap/96oKG1TcvrHymSAhQaAHkXcLARY>
Subject: Re: [Jmap] Adding the Message::isForwarded property
X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol <jmap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/jmap>, <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/jmap/>
List-Post: <mailto:jmap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jmap>, <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 07:27:28 -0000

Hi,

> On 19 Apr 2017, at 07:20, Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com> wrote:
> 
> I don't know why we would stick with the same keywords for the flags as IMAP uses.  I wonder if any IMAP implementors are storing these flags in textual format anyway.  

If a server supports arbitrary IMAP keywords, it has to. Multiple implementations do.

> We certainly aren't.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email