Re: Generalizing subaddress

[Michael Haardt <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 06:48:16PM +0100, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> >1.  There is always a "user" part, which refers to an account
> >   in the email system.
> >2.  There might be a "detail" part.
> >3.  There might be a couple of detail parts.
> >
> # 3 is an interesting idea, but I think it is taking the idea of 
> flexibility of this extension way too far.

I thought of multiple detail parts, when I first suggested to have a
generic subaddress extension, but figured if people wanted to work with
such complexity, variables were most likely required, too.

A generic subaddress extension covers a large range of applications that
do not require variables, whereas multiple detail parts are used rarely,
often tied closely to specific software.  If anybody needs them urgently,
please speak up.  _I_ just need a generic subaddressing facility without
variables and with a single detail part urgently. ;-)

> A particular implementation can threat "detail" as a structured field, 
> Sieve variables can be used to extract parts of it.

Or a new extension that relies on variables could extract the detail parts
from the given address into variables, avoiding the structured field.  In
case someone decides it is worth writing a draft.

> So let's keep the document the way it is.

Agreed.

Michael