IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"HANSEN, TONY L" <tony@att.com> Mon, 01 May 2017 17:48 UTC

Return-Path: <tony@att.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 0FC2B1294F5 for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 May 2017 10:48:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.48
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.48 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 D1XvAzaF4VzM for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 May 2017 10:48:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E73EE1243FE for <jmap@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 May 2017 10:44:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0049463.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049463.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id v41Hiumb047674 for <jmap@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 May 2017 13:44:56 -0400
Received: from alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp7.sbc.com [144.160.229.24]) by m0049463.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2a68uyhmbk-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <jmap@ietf.org>; Mon, 01 May 2017 13:44:55 -0400
Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v41HiraQ022436 for <jmap@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 May 2017 13:44:53 -0400
Received: from mlpi407.sfdc.sbc.com (mlpi407.sfdc.sbc.com [130.9.128.239]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v41HimV6022336 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for <jmap@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 May 2017 13:44:51 -0400
Received: from MISOUT7MSGHUBAD.ITServices.sbc.com (MISOUT7MSGHUBAD.itservices.sbc.com [130.9.129.148]) by mlpi407.sfdc.sbc.com (RSA Interceptor) for <jmap@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 May 2017 17:44:40 GMT
Received: from MISOUT7MSGUSRCG.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.7.29]) by MISOUT7MSGHUBAD.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.9.129.148]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Mon, 1 May 2017 13:44:40 -0400
From: "HANSEN, TONY L" <tony@att.com>
CC: "jmap@ietf.org" <jmap@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Jmap] Adding the Message::isForwarded property
Thread-Index: AQHSwptp/3qBlL4ysEWf00twd7gFhqHfwAAA
Date: Mon, 01 May 2017 17:44:40 +0000
Message-ID: <CD185881-CE7F-416C-9D5F-14E45AFEABEB@att.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> <1A7624AF-2FD9-4FE8-A29D-23BFADEED04B@apple.com> <1493360522.1171603.959013464.217C003E@webmail.messagingengine.com> <9FA9B645-EAE3-412C-923A-77B0987E70B4@oracle.com>
In-Reply-To: <9FA9B645-EAE3-412C-923A-77B0987E70B4@oracle.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.91.122.222]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <B38740D7CD29194EA52EB02F121287E8@LOCAL>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-RSA-Inspected: yes
X-RSA-Classifications: public
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-05-01_12:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1703280000 definitions=main-1705010113
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jmap/oUOdaN3O9W-JxqlxTzJGQLpywVo>
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: Mon, 01 May 2017 17:48:20 -0000

On 5/1/17, 12:50 PM, "Jmap on behalf of Chris Newman" <jmap-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of chris.newman@oracle.com> wrote:

    On 27 Apr 2017, at 23:22, Neil Jenkins wrote:
    > Firstly, I think we should map the 4 \System flags to $System in JMAP.
    > Using backslash is a real pain because it is an escape character in
    > JSON, so examples in the spec are confusing if nothing else! Changing 
    > it
    > to $ would make the system keywords consistent with the IANA 
    > registered
    > keywords, which I believe will be less confusing for developers coming
    > in without an IMAP background. The only issue would be what to do if
    > someone has added "$Flagged" etc. user keywords on an IMAP server. 
    > This
    > seems unlikely to be much of a real-world occurrence to me, on the 
    > basis
    > it would have been very confusing, but I think we can just specify 
    > that
    > these keywords are not visible over JMAP.
    
    If you choose to map \System to $System, I'd suggest making the JMAP 
    specification IANA considerations section register the four $System 
    flags in the IMAP keyword registry as "names reserved for use by JMAP; 
    use in IMAP not recommended". I'd also suggest renaming the registry to 
    "IMAP/JMAP keywords" or "IMAP keywords and JMAP flags" (depending on 
    terminology you want to use).

Concur. Note: this would also add an “Updates: 5788” to the spec.

	Tony

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email