Subject: [lemonade] A Few Comments on profile-bis-01

From: Randall Gellens <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 16:23:56 -0700

(1) I find the use of numeric references hard to read.  For example:

    In the [14]/[15] variant of the Lemonade "forward without download"
    strategy, messages are initially composed and edited within an MUA.
    The [15] extension to [18] is then used to create the messages

Please go back to using named references!

(2) The text says that, after the message has been submitted, "The 
client marks the forwarded message on the IMAP server."  This seems a 
little odd, since, especially in the CATENATE case, the message is 
submitted, not forwarded.  Also, in the non-catenate case, parts of 
various messages are used in subsequent ones, which seems even less 
like forwarding.

(3) Likewise, the description of the $Forwarded flag could be more 
clear that it also means "submitted".
-- 
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly-selected tag: ---------------
Computers are useless.  They can only give you answers.
                            --Pablo Picasso (1881-1973)

_______________________________________________
lemonade mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade

---

From: Dave Cridland <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 09:48:47 +0100

> (1) I find the use of numeric references hard to read.  For example:

Yes, this is a teething issue with the switch to xml2rfc - it's 
simply a missing PI we need to add (I think that's been added now in 
the working copy, but I'll check).

> client marks the forwarded message on the IMAP server."  This seems 
> a little odd, since, especially in the CATENATE case, the message 
> is submitted, not forwarded.  Also, in the non-catenate case, parts 
> of various messages are used in subsequent ones, which seems even 
> less like forwarding.
> 
> 
Speaking personally, I'm in general agreement with you, and raised 
this use of $Forwarded as an issue in Profile 1, but the consensus 
went against me on the use of the flag. I think it's a little odd, 
too, but not exactly incorrect.

Note that it's not the message that's being submitted that's being 
marked, but the message that's used as the source for the attachment, 
thus partially forwarded, so while it's not a traditional "forward", 
neither is it exactly not forwarding either.

> clear that it also means "submitted".

No, it doesn't - although the text relating to which message is being 
marked as $Forwarded ought to be clearer, if you're mislead here. 
I'll try to come up with some better text to describe what's going on.

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

---

From: Randall Gellens <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 12:32:41 -0700

At 9:48 AM +0100 4/21/06, Dave Cridland wrote:

>> client marks the forwarded message on the IMAP server."  This 
>> seems a little odd, since, especially in the CATENATE case, the 
>> message is submitted, not forwarded.  Also, in the non-catenate 
>> case, parts of various messages are used in subsequent ones, which 
>> seems even less like forwarding.
>>
> marked, but the message that's used as the source for the 
> attachment, thus partially forwarded, so while it's not a 
> traditional "forward", neither is it exactly not forwarding either.
>
>  No, it doesn't - although the text relating to which message is 
> being marked as $Forwarded ought to be clearer, if you're mislead 
> here. I'll try to come up with some better text to describe what's 
> going on.

Thanks, Dave.

So I now think we need two things: better text that describes how 
$Forwarded is used, and a way to mark a message as having been 
submitted.

-------------- Randomly-selected tag: ---------------
Pohl's law:
    Nothing is so good that somebody, somewhere, will not hate it.