Sieve Email Filtering: Imap4flags Extension
RFC 5232
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 05 and is now closed.
Lars Eggert No Objection
(Lisa Dusseault; former steering group member) Yes
(Bill Fenner; former steering group member) No Objection
(Brian Carpenter; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection
Nits from gen-art review by Eric Gray: Section 3, third paragraph, last sentence: "MUST cause a runtime error" as opposed to "MUST cause runtime error"... Section 6, first paragraph, last line: "side effect" as opposed to "side affect"...
(Cullen Jennings; former steering group member) No Objection
It would benefit from more use of normative language. For example, I have no idea if you actually have to implement "hasflag" or if it is optional. I find this document very hard to understand or follow. It lacks a coherent overview of the environment it fits into and it reads half way like an programmer guide instead of a specification of all the details an implementer needs to know. The document does not pass idnits (but the important stuff is OK).
(Dan Romascanu; former steering group member) No Objection
(David Kessens; former steering group member) No Objection
(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) No Objection
> The extension decribed in this document doesn't change the implicit > keep (see section 2.10.2 of [SIEVE]). s/decribed/described/
(Jon Peterson; former steering group member) No Objection
(Magnus Westerlund; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection
(Mark Townsley; former steering group member) No Objection
(Ross Callon; former steering group member) No Objection
(Russ Housley; former steering group member) No Objection
The Abstract should not include the [IMAP] reference. Minor rewrite is needed. Section 2 should contain the standard sentence from RFC 2119.
(Sam Hartman; former steering group member) No Objection
I did not find this specification very clear. In particular, the internal variable was quite mystifying. I eventually figured out what it is for, but there is not a description of the intuitive use of the internal variable. The internal variable seems to act as a default for the flags that will be set on a message that is kept or filed. Nothing actually seems to say this though. Also calling it the internal variable is confusing. However this is non-blocking.
(Ted Hardie; former steering group member) No Objection