* Kenny Stoltz <firstname.lastname@example.org> [010306 10:26]:
> Don't close the standard so much. I don't think it's our place to ask
> why they want just the subjects, the tos, froms, etc. I think that there
> ought to be a method of getting any of them in 1 query. Why can't I say
> something like read(subject,to,from,time,date,flags) to read certain
> items within a message. Having them like this isn't overhead, because
> the filesystem isn't real, so I don't see why my client has to be
> limited to reading whatever the standard decides consists of the header.
> I want to have both easy (read header) and in-depth (read a list of
> items I decided on) functions in this standard.
Hi there, I'm new to the Open Groupware Standard discuss mail list but I
will jump in anyway. Please excuse any recklessness as enthusiasm.
The IMAP and POP standards have answered these questions. If the goal is
open XML based definition for a Groupware server (mostly) to client
communication then the trick is to extract the good design goals and
architecture from these efforts and encode them via XML, right? The
extreme of this would be just to use the XML encodings of other
protocols as they are and not mess with re-designing that function at all.
Wham bam. This might be a good first pass. I don't know how many of
the related protocols don't have some draft of an XML spec yet,
Usually there are improvements to be made, so it's worth review,
especially in light of what a client might need to cross-reference the
different types of data with indexing, addressing, the grouping of
"groupware" etc. I wish there was better language for this.
I don't know of references to XML encodings of IMAP or POP, but the IMAP
standard is at http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2060.txt. I think the
first few paragraphs of the abstract define necessary functions pretty
-- -- Grant Bowman <email@example.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Aug 21 2001 - 17:58:03 PDT