WITHIN Search Extension to the IMAP Protocol
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 05 and is now closed.
(Chris Newman) (was Discuss, Yes) Yes
Putting this on agenda for 07-19 to get discuss cleared.
(Jari Arkko) No Objection
(Ron Bonica) No Objection
(Ross Callon) No Objection
(Lisa Dusseault) No Objection
(Lars Eggert) (was Discuss) No Objection
Comment (2007-04-05 for -)
Section 4020, paragraph 0: > For example, if the client requests messages that are younger than > 4020 (67 minutes), but the server only performs searches with hourly > accuracy (as mandated above), the server performs the search as if > the client requested a 60-minute interval. Note the choice of > rounding up or down is at the discretion of the server. However, > rounding down to zero is NOT RECOMMENDED, as this may result in > searches for messages YOUNGER than a value being rounded to YOUNGER > 0, which will always fail. The issue of rounding down for YOUNGER being problematic is important. It should be moved from the example to the preceding paragraph, where behavior is specified. Also, rounding up for OLDER is similarly problematic and should be discouraged, too. (I'll let Cullen hold the DISCUSS on the rounding issue.)
(Sam Hartman) No Objection
(Russ Housley) No Objection
Comment (2007-04-03 for -)
Gen-ART Review by Lucy Lynch. Lucy notes that Lars already has a discuss position posted. She doesn't feel quite as strongly about the YOUNGER calculation as Lars, but she believes a couple examples (good and bad) might help. The abstract is beautifully clear, but the protocol operation section (from "In some cases" on) is less so. The series of key words: "SHOULD" "MUST" "MAY" "NOT RECOMMENDED" make it obvious that the 60 min/YOUNGER interval problem is serious, but it took a couple of reading to visualize the sliding window permutations as described.
(Cullen Jennings) (was Discuss) No Objection
typo in ABNF /= should be =/