IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Jmap] simpler future release & unsend without outbox (was Re: Best vs Good enough - adoption of JMAP)

Neil Jenkins <neilj@fastmail.com> Wed, 26 April 2017 23:52 UTC

Return-Path: <neilj@fastmail.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 0736B129487 for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Apr 2017 16:52:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.719
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.719 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fastmail.com header.b=CbKTIaSX; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=hNKRAnp1
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 DZ_tsvEE1nwO for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Apr 2017 16:52:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCB12126B71 for <jmap@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Apr 2017 16:52:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from betaweb1.internal (betaweb1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.10]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C15C21BAA; Wed, 26 Apr 2017 19:52:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from betaweb1 ([::ffff:10.202.2.10]) by betaweb1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 26 Apr 2017 19:52:55 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.com; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=w2MK1Pv45CLgkF2AgYQMISljbdLof b4X1H1jOIuGF1E=; b=CbKTIaSXeGofF1EVu7qXdvbhqD0BLkjZ9KE9E5yQ4vrlE vsAEYMB8nP09aXS0Pu66HVYi5xL2XZNV7I5MrsaKZNipJNvjm+MCv7K78ACHhhIw sunHK9V+R18Q7wMfzWeG2LAZfj0uGccgNSztrSsfrabtsyJcPfWdMx2grjgPBNVo BdRmS8JZH3l/45Y+wGddOErsmv8ebElttIHfiAoVRm8V89nqjFFIWCeCYC40nGX+ Vt5LiCUuR6F/nGHdvbIgvXEFqKz+zjJRvo7G0cIDuLpDQHt0dUuWy3cPxpBgrtfo 5AWpKBBSwMRuWo9F0vTxl1QVPTS+tgPRerjvtcc1A==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=w2MK1P v45CLgkF2AgYQMISljbdLofb4X1H1jOIuGF1E=; b=hNKRAnp1YZEPbvjJ3pb8nC e1wRirvs9xEo4SzJHXR9ZYYfao7NWJymrw9nQ3VpcF5Ejr9mEzx+RiSIp0KE4o15 XL1qbr6Kdm9IjVLbUbdvGYZZ7pkSFI+qStFYsrQZayVOVvTmv4UKVJGjnjIhBw6Q GpmOZ6v8za2uRycl7cW3OqRq9tCyv5awd3Rh0NRQnYECjkc7ySZvL8dTF7hXHdC6 rBJra7xdAQ5pkJTenaw8y+V1zJ0OLP6NZw6b9xHqUqsL5k60oPrz1E4eTElC5yGN IVFe5LLOUHiO4099wMi14WAbNf+cfnDN+Sfus6Lh6wgy5Tyfq1y1qYYVkm5ZjZsw ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:1jIBWbIWd1kejms-ajlKLlWC8vxOSm0TcbORSMSpimTvF9jXy-vIvA>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id BA521E27D8; Wed, 26 Apr 2017 19:52:54 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <1493250774.1341635.957564528.05401825@webmail.messagingengine.com>
From: Neil Jenkins <neilj@fastmail.com>
To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
Cc: jmap@ietf.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_----------=_149325077413416351"
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-843b6574
In-Reply-To: <em92ecb8af-662d-4f7d-bff0-39961dd819f1@bodybag>
References: <em8b177018-4769-44ea-b033-90bd8155d11b@bodybag> <46F700A6-C2B1-488B-A8B4-6ACD45B03C31@oracle.com> <CFC38D13-0CB2-4ABF-9403-DF0F773314B7@fugue.com> <D35A79C2-3918-4BB7-B97D-D56CA7548DCD@oracle.com> <1493099769.3023399.955193288.6D0312CC@webmail.messagingengine.com> <33553450-82F4-4CB4-8679-C9F52D8A8839@oracle.com> <1493163974.4122214.956244160.6735E49C@webmail.messagingengine.com> <EDCC6149-9222-468E-A17B-DDBA88A52D95@oracle.com> <1493185260.709114.956477904.75CB343B@webmail.messagingengine.com> <B2FD4698-E783-4D15-BA4E-B637A070E6A9@oracle.com> <1493248332.1295949.957537688.05443911@webmail.messagingengine.com> <em92ecb8af-662d-4f7d-bff0-39961dd819f1@bodybag>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2017 23:52:54 +0000
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jmap/_jcND0SQomY0G_Xg6z4Gll6yofY>
Subject: Re: [Jmap] simpler future release & unsend without outbox (was Re: Best vs Good enough - adoption of JMAP)
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, 26 Apr 2017 23:52:57 -0000

On Wed, 26 Apr 2017, at 11:40 PM, Adrien de Croy wrote:
> my personal experience with the outbox folder is that it's a pain in
> the neck..
Ignoring the fact that this is one anecdote vs the UX design choice of a
multitude of real products, if the outbox is separate to the sent
mailbox at the protocol level it is still trivial for an MUA to present
them as a single mailbox should that be what you wish to implement. You
can easily get a message list with messages in (A OR B). Doing the
inverse is much harder.
Neil.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email