[Imap-protocol] [noob] multiple fetch responses for the same message?

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Mon Nov 14 08:48:35 PST 2011


On Mon Nov 14 16:36:34 2011, Mark Crispin wrote:

> On Mon, 14 Nov 2011, Dave Cridland wrote:

>> 1) Sending everything in one response, but not having UID first.

>> * 42 FETCH (RFC822.SIZE 12345 UID 100)

>> This is entirely legitimate, and trips up some clients.

>

> Such clients deserve to be tripped up.

>

>

I don't disagree... But I'm also pragmatic enough to consider that
insufficient motivation to avoid tripping them up if practical.



>> 2) Sending as Mark's example, but reversed:

>> * 42 FETCH (RFC822.SIZE 12345)

>> * 42 FETCH (UID 100 ENVELOPE (...))

>> This will trip up some clients; but in practise the RFC822.SIZE

>> response will simply be discarded. Still, this is particularly

>> pathological anyway.

>

> It is pathological if RFC822.SIZE was not requested by the UID

> FETCH. It

> is forbidden by the statement that I quoted in RFC 3501.

>

>

Well, it's just plain wrong if it's been requested, and it's weird if
it hasn't been.


> UID is not an access key. It is a message property. In the examples

> above,

> RFC822.SIZE 12345 and UID 100 are both properties of message 42.

> RFC822.SIZE 12345 is not a property of UID 100.

>

> Now, it may be useful to determine that the message with property

> UID 100

> also has the property RFC822.SIZE 12345. But that only happens

> through the

> common access key of message 42.


Again, I don't disagree - even if internally in Polymer, the UID *is*
the primary key.

But it seems a relatively simple way of improving interoperability
without actively causing any worse problems.

Dave.
--
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave at cridland.net - xmpp:dwd at dave.cridland.net
- acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
- http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade



More information about the Imap-protocol mailing list