[16:59:42] --- hardie has joined
[17:14:06] --- SAH has joined
[17:15:57] --- peterd has joined
[17:21:09] --- leg has joined
[17:21:50] --- resnick has joined
[17:22:21] --- RandyG has joined
[17:22:33] --- NFreed has joined
[17:22:42] <leg> status of i18n, sort
[17:22:54] <NFreed> Status of i18n, sort
[17:23:09] <NFreed> Held on comparator draft, which needs IANA review and buyin
[17:23:30] --- gillos has joined
[17:23:47] <NFreed> Chris Newman reports that he has had a meeting with Michelle Cotton (IANA) and progress was made
[17:24:55] <NFreed> Some discussion of i18n suppor tin IMAP - how did it happen (or not)
[17:25:03] <NFreed> New topic: List extensions
[17:25:12] <NFreed> Issue: What to do about \Placeholder
[17:25:24] <NFreed> (Mark Crispin has asked if we can get rid of it)
[17:26:02] <NFreed> Need comments from mail client writers on how useful different flags and options are - Mark thinks it is overengineered
[17:26:06] --- waynet has joined
[17:26:40] <NFreed> Discussion of how children are handled
[17:27:07] --- rpayn422 has joined
[17:27:15] <NFreed> Is server support of children optional?
[17:27:57] <NFreed> Mark wants to drop all LSUB semantics.
[17:28:22] <NFreed> Disagreement on whether or not there is a reasonable replacement
[17:28:35] --- tonyhansen has joined
[17:28:59] <NFreed> Ask client people to post to the list asking if they would use \Placeholder
[17:29:24] <NFreed> Alexey Melnikov will formulate the question and post it to the list.
[17:29:51] <resnick> Cyrus Daboo to try to answer
[17:30:36] <NFreed> Currently filter/select concepts are combined;
[17:30:57] <NFreed> Propose: Two parts, one to match mailboxes, other to control info returned.
[17:31:11] --- waynet has left: Logged out
[17:31:23] <NFreed> LIST <match-options> mailbox-spec RETURN <return-options>
[17:31:34] --- hildjj has joined
[17:32:35] <NFreed> Some argument that all options need to be returned.
[17:32:49] --- waynet has joined
[17:32:52] <NFreed> Cyrus argues that this is good for use with ANNOTATEMORE
[17:33:39] <NFreed> Lisa proposes changing <return-options> to <also-return>
[17:34:19] <NFreed> Example: LIST "" "INBOX.*" RETURN (SUBSCRIBED)
[17:35:05] <NFreed> Proposal: Any responses that are implied by what you're asking for will be provided automatically
[17:35:28] <NFreed> E.g. if you say "no standard flags" you'll still get subscribed if you're querying on that.
[17:36:00] <NFreed> Another example: Looking up status or ACL doesn't need to return standard flags
[17:36:12] <NFreed> Proposal will be sent to the list.
[17:36:20] <NFreed> New topic: Annotate draft
[17:36:25] --- hildjj has left
[17:37:00] <NFreed> ACL issues: Cyrus says he tried to keep ACL as informative.
[17:37:14] --- amarine has joined
[17:38:02] <NFreed> Noted that ACL can be referenced because it is already an RFC; ACL2 is not done yet.
[17:38:21] <NFreed> All the bits needed are in ACL but some of the explanation of what the
[17:38:27] <NFreed> bits mean appears to be missing.
[17:39:14] <leg> specifically what the old [READ-ONLY] and [READ-WRITE] mean and whether ACL should imply one or the other.
[17:39:33] <NFreed> Pete Resnick is concerned about how mailbox access rights tie into this.
[17:39:40] <NFreed> (Annotations, that is.)
[17:40:38] <NFreed> ACL2 apparently resolves this but is it ready to reference?
[17:41:36] <NFreed> Shared annotations only interact with read-only/read-write.
[17:41:48] <NFreed> No connection with ACL.
[17:41:54] <NFreed> Private annotations are where the problem is.
[17:42:07] <NFreed> Pete argues for clearly separating these things.
[17:43:13] <NFreed> One option is to base it on ACL2 and add another bit controlling the ability to write private annotations
[17:44:04] <NFreed> Really want this out before ACL2. Could leave it open to be done in ACL2.
[17:44:20] <NFreed> New idea: New bit added to _old_ ACL.
[17:45:21] <NFreed> Chris Newman, channeling Mark Crispin, says adding stuff to ACL is bad because there are implementation that do not/cannot support old ACL.
[17:45:52] --- corby has joined
[17:46:23] --- waynet has left
[17:46:44] <RandyG> Issue of how old clients that don't understand annotate will handle new bit
[17:46:45] <NFreed> Need to warn that clients should not copy ACL bits they do not recognize.
[17:46:57] <RandyG> they may inadvertently set or clear the bit
[17:47:13] <RandyG> if they delete the flag they will remove rights
[17:47:22] <RandyG> need to add this text to security considerations of annotate
[17:47:36] --- leg has left: Replaced by new connection
[17:47:36] --- leg has joined
[17:47:36] --- leg has left
[17:47:58] <NFreed> Also needs to be added to ACL2.
[17:48:27] <RandyG> adding to old acl also requires discussing tied rights
[17:48:42] <NFreed> New issue: Shared v private annotations
[17:48:44] <RandyG> other ways to go: use existing flagg in old acl
[17:48:54] <RandyG> or punt it to acl2
[17:49:22] --- corby has left: Disconnected
[17:49:30] <RandyG> need discussion of meaning or private annotations; make it clear that this is per-user
[17:49:35] <NFreed> Annotate needs to clear that "private" means per-user, not access restricted
[17:49:46] <RandyG> Cyrus suggests changing name from .prv to .user
[17:49:55] <NFreed> Should ".priv" become ".user"?
[17:50:07] <NFreed> Issue left to document editor.
[17:51:21] <NFreed> Lisa asks for addiitional review of sec cons
[17:51:26] <NFreed> Are we missing anything?
[17:53:05] <NFreed> Issue: Can set \deleted flag with D right, can set it with annotations with different rights.
[17:54:46] <NFreed> Put another way: What is "allowed to set annotation is on" but "allowed to set \deleted flag" is off?
[17:57:08] --- leg has joined
[17:57:42] <NFreed> Another question: What happens if you set the shared and private versions of the annotation flags to different values?
[17:57:52] <NFreed> Answer: This is server-dependent.
[18:00:20] <NFreed> (Discussion of implications of \deleted having two states.)
[18:03:42] <NFreed> (Discussion of the merits of making flags visible through annotations.)
[18:04:24] --- rpayn422 has left: Replaced by new connection
[18:04:30] --- rpayne has joined
[18:07:56] <NFreed> Question: If shared are either shared or per-user, and only appear
[18:08:29] <NFreed> under the appropriate annotate hierarchy, how does the client learn where
[18:08:36] <NFreed> to go to set them.
[18:08:57] <NFreed> Proposal: Don't use the suffix on flags in annotate.
[18:09:29] <RandyG> Suggestion to special-case \seen and \deleted
[18:09:47] <RandyG> These two would not use suffix (or either suffix would be identical)
[18:11:25] <NFreed> Focusing on \seen for the moment:
[18:11:52] <RandyG> for \seen, FETCH implicitly updates something (per-user or shared, depending on server)
[18:13:43] <NFreed> Proposal: Don't map flags to annotate
[18:15:10] --- Glenn Parsons has joined
[18:15:58] <NFreed> Problem with this is that old clients will use flags. new ones use annotations, don't interop
[18:17:00] --- Glenn Parsons has left: Replaced by new connection
[18:18:59] --- peterd has left: Disconnected
[18:20:34] <NFreed> Spent long enough; punting to the list.
[18:20:54] <NFreed> (Need a history review of why the tie was done in the first place.)
[18:21:33] <NFreed> New topic: ACL2
[18:21:53] <NFreed> Wait for LISTEXT - depends on LISTEXT syntax
[18:22:07] <NFreed> Idea: Publish separately un update to existing IMAP ACL doc
[18:22:11] <NFreed> Complete list of rights
[18:22:19] <NFreed> Tablle of rights <-> operations
[18:22:32] <NFreed> Clarifies when to return read-only/read-write
[18:26:31] <NFreed> Discussion of how to announce presence of new bits
[18:27:38] <NFreed> Proposal: RIGHTS=rightlist capability
[18:28:46] <NFreed> Some skepticism that "this will just be a little tweak to ACL" is what
[18:28:52] <NFreed> led to the present ACL2
[18:32:12] <NFreed> Discussion of returning current rights information in select
[18:32:19] <NFreed> Deemed out of scope for ACL.
[18:35:05] <NFreed> Now doing charter bashing.
[18:35:44] <NFreed> Discussion of "May 00 Submit an Internet-Draft enumerating known problems to avoid in the base specification"
[18:37:06] --- norifmi has joined
[18:37:32] <NFreed> Item dropped from charter
[18:37:46] <NFreed> Sort/Thread submitted to IESG in Feb 2004
[18:38:02] <NFreed> Discussion of Aug 04 date for annotate doing to WG last call
[18:38:13] <NFreed> Oct 04 Submit annotate spec to IESG
[18:38:33] <NFreed> Aug 04 LS last call for LIST extensions? Oct 04 to IESG?
[18:40:04] <NFreed> Oct 04 Submit I-D to update existing ACL specification
[18:40:32] <NFreed> (explains rights & listing rights in CAPABILITY)
[18:40:44] <NFreed> Aug 04 Last call for i18n doc
[18:41:01] <NFreed> Sep 04 Submit i18n to IESG
[18:42:41] <NFreed> Discussion of whether or not to do ACL2 in this WG.
[18:43:40] <hardie> Let's not ask who cares--let's ask who is willing to do the work to get it done: edit the drafts, review the drafts, write the code...
[18:45:23] <NFreed> Nov 04 revised ACL2 with Feb 05 drop dead date for completion
[18:49:19] --- SAH has left
[18:49:22] <NFreed> Meeting ends (1/2 hour early)
[18:49:25] --- hardie has left: Disconnected
[18:49:35] --- NFreed has left: Disconnected
[18:49:44] --- amarine has left
[18:53:45] --- gillos has left
[18:55:24] --- norifmi has left
[19:01:19] --- leg has left: Disconnected
[19:11:19] --- tonyhansen has left: Disconnected
[19:19:04] --- RandyG has left: Disconnected
[19:21:19] --- rpayne has left
[19:31:30] --- RandyG has joined
[19:31:44] --- resnick has left
[21:12:57] --- leg has joined
[21:13:42] --- leg has left: Replaced by new connection
[21:13:43] --- leg has joined
[21:13:43] --- leg has left
[21:19:42] --- RandyG has left: Replaced by new connection