Subject: Re: Sieve Vacation and draft-moore-auto-email-response-04

From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 10:34:11 +0100

Jutta Degener writes:
> I don't think we should describe or limit the behavior of editor 
> applications at all.
>
> One, clients aren't our core competency. We're describing a language, 
> not the diverse applications that produce scripts written in it.

An editor parses applications written in it, which is in scope. I agree 
that the other functions of the editor are out of scope.

I think this is worth a sentence or so, making potential high-level 
editor author aware that they need to parse both utf-8 and 2047-encoded 
blah.

--Arnt

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 08:49:31 -0800 (PST)

> [email-masked] wrote:

> > I suppose the obvious thing to do would be to let the user edit the
> > charset field separately from the content of the field. But this
> > gets very complex very quickly -- there are lots and lots of charsets
> > and what do you do when they pick a charset that doesn't support all
> > the characters that were specified?
> > Simply allowing access to the raw encoded words in the editor is probably
> > what's going to happen in any case.

> Do you think it's worth noting this as a SHOULD?

I guess that would be OK.

				Ned

---

From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme <[email-masked]>
Date: 02 Nov 2003 23:22:32 +0100

> editor author aware that they need to parse both utf-8 and 2047-encoded 

should it?  IMO, that high-level editor should leave it alone, since the
user typed it in explicitly as encoded words for a reason.  but this is
a UI question, really.

it may be a good idea to mention that when the MDA assembles the
vacation message, strings containing only US-ASCII and matching the
encoded word syntax must be left alone rather than being escaped.  this
means that if you want to use a verbatim encoded word as your full name,
you have to either include non-ASCII characters elsewhere, or encode the
string yourself.

-- 
Kjetil T.

---

From: Jutta Degener <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 10:47:28 -0800

> that the other functions of the editor are out of scope.

I thought we were discussing proscribing how the editor lets
its users enter input that eventually ends up in a field to
the vacation command.  ("Have a separate field to let people
enter the charset for later RFC2047-encoding.")  That's different
from the command syntax itself.

> editor author aware that they need to parse both utf-8 and 2047-encoded 

Yeah, that's reasonable.

Jutta