Re: Protocol Action: 'INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - SORT AND THREAD EXTENSIONS' to Proposed Standard

[Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@xxxxxxxxx>]

Mark Crispin wrote:

>
> The author of the document(s) in question hereby states his complete
> lack of concern as to whether the title of the published RFC is
> uppercase or titlecase. He was doing nothing other than following past
> precedents; and those precedents that he used were all uppercase.
>
> Of greater concern to the author is the BLOBCHAR/NONWSP issue. I have
> already contacted Chris Newman on this matter. This change can be
> interpreted as imposing a mandate on IMAP server implementations that
> does not currently exist; arguably conflicts with RFC 5051; and in
> real life is moot due to external specifications (RFC 2822 among
> others). Due to the last point, a string that triggers this rule is an
> invalid string.
>
> With Chris' permission, I request that this particular RFC Editor note
> either be waived or be made as a documentation suggestion only.

Speaking as an individual: +1.

According to <https://datatracker.ietf.org/idtracker/ballot/1157/> Chris
agreed with this and he updated his comment to only mention adding the
reference to RFC 3629.

> On Thu, 3 Apr 2008, Russ Housley wrote:
>
>>
>> See RFC 3501
>>
>> At 05:27 PM 4/3/2008, Bob Braden wrote:
>>
>>> *> The IESG has approved the following document:
>>> *>
>>> *> - 'INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - SORT AND THREAD EXTENSIONS '
>>> *> <draft-ietf-imapext-sort-20.txt> as a Proposed Standard
>>> *>
>>>
>>> Why is this document shouting at us? Title case is the norm for
>>> RFCs.
>>>
>>> RFC Editor/bb
>>>
>>> *> Two simple/optional improvements:
>>> *> Add a normative reference to STD 63 (RFC3629) for UTF-8.
>>> *> Instead of allowing any 8-bit in BLOBCHAR and NONWSP, reference
>>> the rules
>>> *> in RFC 3629 for well-formed UTF-8 (UTF8-2, UTF8-3, UTF8-4).
>>> *>
>>