Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sieve-notify-xmpp-00.txt

[Dave Cridland <[e-mail]>]

On Wed May 17 11:35:21 2006, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>>> Personally, I'd be happiest with a URI to the new message, where
>>> possible, but i appreciate there's security concerns there.
>>>    
>> What form would such a URI take?
>>  
> Can be an IMAP (draft-ietf-lemonade-rfc2192bis-02.txt) or HTTP URL.
> 
> 
Could reasonably be a mailto: URL, too, which might merely identify 
the email address the mail arrived at, as a fallback. (OMA's EMN 
format uses a non-IANA registered scheme for that kind of thing, too).


>> IMHO the account and message identification considerations belong 
>> in
>> draft-ietf-sieve-notify rather than in the XMPP "profile" thereof 
>> (which
>> would simply provide an instantiation of those considerations).
>>  
> Maybe you are right, but I don't think that draft-ietf-sieve-notify 
> can prescribe any particular URI type, because this would vary from 
> one deployment/implementation to another.
> 
> 
It could say "Notifications SHOULD include a URL for the recipient to 
use as a hint for locating the message. Where the nature of the 
notification allows, this SHOULD be marked in a machine-readable 
manner (such as an attribute in XML)."

Dave.
-- 
           You see things; and you say "Why?"
   But I dream things that never were; and I say "Why not?"
    - George Bernard Shaw