Re: [Jmap] Draft messages - mutability

[Ted Lemon <[e-mail]>]

If drafts are mutable, the implication is that synchronization based on
message ID can't happen without something like a version modifier. At which
point why not make every message versioned?

On Apr 24, 2017 9:35 PM, "Neil Jenkins" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Apr 2017, at 11:02 AM, Chris Newman wrote:
>
> I see a lot of cost and no benefit to making a draft a different
> datatype from a message.
>
>
> I don't see any benefit to making it a different data type. However, what
> we currently have is that, like IMAP, a message is immutable except for
> flags/mailboxes. This is a pain for client authors trying to keep track of
> a single draft as it is saved through multiple revisions (especially when
> the user has multiple clients). One possible solution to this is to simply
> say any message with the \Draft flag set is fully mutable (while keeping
> the same id). I think we would also want the server to enforce that a
> message cannot be changed from/to draft state after creation. If it starts
> a draft it stays a draft, or vice versa.
>
> From a protocol perspective, since most messages won't be drafts (with a
> normal user) you still get the efficiency of immutable messages (you only
> have to refetch flags/mailboxes, not the whole message) for most of the
> messages in the mail store. But it will be easier for MUAs to handle
> drafts, and particularly allow for a much better experience when editing
> the same draft message across multiple devices.
>
> Neil.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jmap mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jmap
>
>