More evil hierarchy delimiters

The RFC says:

      All children of a top-level hierarchy node MUST use
      the same separator character.  A NIL hierarchy
delimiter means
      that no hierarchy exists; the name is a
"flat" name.

After first reading I thought that you couldn't mix NIL with
another
delimiter, but I guess because the first sentence says
"character", not
"delimiter" it is allowed (plus UW-IMAP does it).
Maybe the next RFC
could clear that up.

So, apparently this should be possible:

1 LIST "" %
* LIST (NoInferiors) NIL INBOX
* LIST (NoSelect HasChildren) "/" childboxes
* LIST (NoInferiors) NIL foo

But what about this one:

1 LIST "" %
* LIST (NoInferiors) NIL INBOX
* LIST (NoSelect HasChildren) "/" childboxes
* LIST (NoInferiors) NIL "foo/bar"


_______________________________________________
Imap-protocol mailing list
Imap-protocolu.washington.edu
https://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listin
fo/imap-protocol

On Wed, 27 Jun 2007, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> The RFC says:
>       All children of a top-level hierarchy node MUST
use
>       the same separator character.  A NIL hierarchy
delimiter means
>       that no hierarchy exists; the name is a
"flat" name.
> After first reading I thought that you couldn't mix NIL
with another
> delimiter, but I guess because the first sentence says
"character", not
> "delimiter" it is allowed (plus UW-IMAP does
it). Maybe the next RFC
> could clear that up.

No.  Your confusion here is that INBOX is in a class by
itself.  It is not 
part of the default namespace.  That's why the RFC goes on
to say that 
INBOX is included in the LIST results if it matches the
pattern; that too 
is a special rule since otherwise INBOX would not be
listed.

Both of your examples are not possible:

> 1 LIST "" %
> * LIST (NoInferiors) NIL INBOX
> * LIST (NoSelect HasChildren) "/"
childboxes
> * LIST (NoInferiors) NIL foo
>
> 1 LIST "" %
> * LIST (NoInferiors) NIL INBOX
> * LIST (NoSelect HasChildren) "/"
childboxes
> * LIST (NoInferiors) NIL "foo/bar"

because the second and third items have conflicting
hierarchy semantics. 
The first example (INBOX) does not conflict since INBOX is
not part of the 
default namespace.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for
lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.
_______________________________________________
Imap-protocol mailing list
Imap-protocolu.washington.edu
https://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listin
fo/imap-protocol