%% You should probably cite rfc5257 instead of this I-D. @techreport{ietf-imapext-annotate-16, number = {draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-16}, type = {Internet-Draft}, institution = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, note = {Work in Progress}, url = {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-imapext-annotate/16/}, author = {Cyrus Daboo and Randall Gellens}, title = {{Internet Message Access Protocol - ANNOTATE Extension}}, pagetotal = 31, year = 2006, month = oct, day = 19, abstract = {The ANNOTATE extension to the Internet Message Access Protocol permits clients and servers to maintain "meta data" for messages, or individual message parts, stored in a mailbox on the server. For example, this can be used to attach comments and other useful information to a message. It is also possible to attach annotations to specific parts of a message, so that, for example, they could be marked as seen, or important, or a comment added. Note that this document was the product of a WG that had good consensus on how to approach the problem. Nevertheless, the WG felt it did not have enough information on implementation and deployment hurdles to meet all of the requirements of a Proposed Standard. The IETF solicits implementations and implementation reports in order to make further progress. Implementers should be aware that this specification may change in an incompatible manner when going to Proposed Standard status. However, any incompatible changes will result in a new capability name being used to prevent problems with any deployments of the experimental extension. This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community.}, }