[Imap-protocol] SELECT/EXAMINE clarification of UNSEEN

Bron Gondwana brong at fastmail.fm
Mon Nov 14 13:09:27 PST 2011



> > Intelligent and talented people, if they find that trivial matter to be

> > annoying enough, will write an errata with proposed replacement wording,

> > post it for review, and upon general concensus will submit it to the RFC

> > 3501 errata for inclusion in a future revision.

>

> I started work on this and saved this as a draft for days, but haven't

> yet finished. I'll give it another go tonight.


This is a diff - I haven't written it up as an errata yet, partially
because I have no experience with the standards process - so I'm not
sure exactly what to write - and partially because I'd like feedback
on the wording first.

brong at launde:~$ diff rfc3501.txt rfc3501_new.txt
1748,1749c1748,1749
< REQUIRED OK untagged responses: UNSEEN, PERMANENTFLAGS,
< UIDNEXT, UIDVALIDITY
---

> REQUIRED OK untagged responses: PERMANENTFLAGS,

> UIDNEXT, UIDVALIDITY, UNSEEN (if any exist)

1779c1779,1782
< SEARCH command if it wants to find it.
---

> SEARCH command if it wants to find it. If there are

> no unseen messages in the mailbox, it is not possible

> to produce a sensible UNSEEN value, so servers MUST

> omit this item.

5931a5935,5937

>

> 115) Clarify that servers MUST NOT return the UNSEEN untagged response

> from SELECT or EXAMINE if there are no unseen messages in the mailbox.



Thanks in advance for feedback,

Bron.



More information about the Imap-protocol mailing list