Subject: Re: List of expected changes for sieve 05 draft

From: Tim Showalter <[email-masked]>
Date: 11 Nov 1998 14:55:43 -0500

> Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 11:40:59 -0800
> From: Randall Gellens <[email-masked]>

> >> My Sieve implementation uses "envelope.rcpt" and "envelope.from" as tests.
> >
> > Do we need to add . to the list of legal characters in an identifier?
> > I'd rather not.
> 
> I don't consider "." as part of an identifier.  I treat "envelope.rcpt" 
> as two identifiers: "envelope", which indicates use of the envelope 
> extension, and "rcpt", which is recognized within the envelope 
> extension context.

According to the grammar, you can't have dot outside of a quoted string
or a multi-line.  It can't be part of the identifier, and it can't just
be there.

I'm under the impression that the point of the major grammar changes in
04 were so that extensions didn't have to change the grammar.  I really
don't want to start doing that, because it will get ugly real fast.

To be honest, I don't like dot in that context because it looks like a
structure reference to me.  Then again, I can't think of anything I like
better, but I want a third opinion.

Either we need to change the grammar to allow the extension, or the
extension to fit the grammar, and I'd like to know which.

-- 
Tim Showalter <[email-masked]>

---

From: Randall Gellens <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 12:36:53 -0800

> extension to fit the grammar, and I'd like to know which.

Let's use the syntax Barry suggested.  Both Ned and I like it, even 
though each of us has implementations which use different syntax.