draft-ietf-imapext-sort-10.txt   draft-ietf-imapext-sort-11.txt 
IMAP Extensions Working Group M. Crispin IMAP Extensions Working Group M. Crispin
INTERNET-DRAFT: IMAP SORT K. Murchison INTERNET-DRAFT: IMAP SORT K. Murchison
Document: internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imapext-sort-10.txt June 2002 Document: internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imapext-sort-11.txt December 2002
INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - SORT EXTENSION INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - SORT AND THREAD EXTENSION
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC 2026. all provisions of Section 10 of RFC 2026.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as other groups may also distribute working documents as
Internet-Drafts. Internet-Drafts.
skipping to change at page 1, line 36 skipping to change at page 1, line 36
To view the list Internet-Draft Shadow Directories, see To view the list Internet-Draft Shadow Directories, see
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
A revised version of this document will be submitted to the RFC A revised version of this document will be submitted to the RFC
editor as an Informational Document for the Internet Community. editor as an Informational Document for the Internet Community.
A revised version of this draft document will be submitted to the RFC A revised version of this draft document will be submitted to the RFC
editor as a Proposed Standard for the Internet Community. Discussion editor as a Proposed Standard for the Internet Community. Discussion
and suggestions for improvement are requested, and should be sent to and suggestions for improvement are requested, and should be sent to
ietf-imapext@IMC.ORG. This document will expire before 22 December ietf-imapext@IMC.ORG. This document will expire before 12 June 2003.
2002. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Abstract Abstract
This document describes an experimental server-based sorting This document describes the base-level server-based sorting and
extension to the IMAP4rev1 protocol, as implemented by the University threading extension to the [IMAP] protocol. This extension provides
of Washington's IMAP toolkit. This extension provides substantial substantial performance improvements for IMAP clients which offer
performance improvements for IMAP clients which offer sorted views. sorted and threaded views.
A server which supports this extension indicates this with a A server which supports the base-level SORT extension indicates this
capability name of "SORT". Client implementations SHOULD accept any with a capability name which starts with "SORT". Future, upwards-
capability name which begins with "SORT" as indicating support for compatible extensions to the SORT extension will all start with
the extension described in this document. This provides for future "SORT", indicating support for this base level.
upwards-compatible extensions.
At the time of this document was written, the IMAP Extensions Working A server which supports this extension indicates this with one or
Group (IETF-IMAPEXT) was considering upwards-compatible additions to more capability names consisting of "THREAD=" followed by a supported
the SORT extension described in this document, tentatively called the threading algorithm name as described in this document. This
SORT2 extension. provides for future upwards-compatible extensions.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to
be interpreted as described in [KEYWORDS].
Base Subject Text Base Subject Text
The "SUBJECT" SORT criteria the "base subject," which has specific Subject sorting and threading use the "base subject," which has
subject artifacts of deployed Internet mail software removed. Due to specific subject artifacts of deployed Internet mail software
the complexity of these artifacts, the formal syntax for the subject removed. Due to the complexity of these artifacts, the formal syntax
extraction rules is ambiguous. The following procedure is followed for the subject extraction rules is ambiguous. The following
to determine the actual "base subject" which is used to sort by procedure is followed to determine the actual "base subject" which is
subject: used to sort by subject:
(1) Convert any RFC 2047 encoded-words in the subject to (1) Convert any RFC 2047 encoded-words in the subject to
UTF-8. Convert all tabs and continuations to space. UTF-8 as described in "internationalization
Convert all multiple spaces to a single space. considerations." Convert all tabs and continuations to
space. Convert all multiple spaces to a single space.
(2) Remove all trailing text of the subject that matches (2) Remove all trailing text of the subject that matches
the subj-trailer ABNF, repeat until no more matches are the subj-trailer ABNF, repeat until no more matches are
possible. possible.
(3) Remove all prefix text of the subject that matches the (3) Remove all prefix text of the subject that matches the
subj-leader ABNF. subj-leader ABNF.
(4) If there is prefix text of the subject that matches the (4) If there is prefix text of the subject that matches the
subj-blob ABNF, and removing that prefix leaves a non-empty subj-blob ABNF, and removing that prefix leaves a non-empty
skipping to change at page 4, line 5 skipping to change at page 3, line 47
subj-fwd-hdr and subj-fwd-trl and repeat from step (2). subj-fwd-hdr and subj-fwd-trl and repeat from step (2).
(7) The resulting text is the "base subject" used in the (7) The resulting text is the "base subject" used in the
SORT. SORT.
All servers and disconnected clients MUST use exactly this algorithm All servers and disconnected clients MUST use exactly this algorithm
when sorting by subject. Otherwise there is potential for a user to when sorting by subject. Otherwise there is potential for a user to
get inconsistent results based on whether they are running in get inconsistent results based on whether they are running in
connected or disconnected IMAP mode. connected or disconnected IMAP mode.
Sent Date
As used in this document, the term "sent date" refers to the date and
time from the Date: header, adjusted by time zone. This differs from
date-related criteria in SEARCH, which use just the date and not the
time, nor adjusts by time zone.
Additional Commands Additional Commands
This command is an extension to the IMAP4rev1 base protocol. This command is an extension to the IMAP4rev1 base protocol.
The section header is intended to correspond with where it would be The section header is intended to correspond with where it would be
located in the main document if it was part of the base located in the main document if it was part of the base
specification. specification.
6.3.SORT. SORT Command 6.3.SORT. SORT Command
skipping to change at page 5, line 45 skipping to change at page 5, line 45
FROM FROM
RFC-822 local-part of the first "From" address. RFC-822 local-part of the first "From" address.
REVERSE REVERSE
Followed by another sort criterion, has the effect of that Followed by another sort criterion, has the effect of that
criterion but in reverse (descending) order. criterion but in reverse (descending) order.
Note: REVERSE only reverses a single criterion, and does not Note: REVERSE only reverses a single criterion, and does not
affect the implicit "sequence number" sort criterion if all affect the implicit "sequence number" sort criterion if all
other criteria are identicial. Consequently, a sort of other criteria are identicial. Consequently, a sort of
REVERSE SUBJECT is not the same as a reverse ordering of a REVERSE SUBJECT is not the same as a reverse ordering of a
SUBJECT sort. SUBJECT sort. This can be avoided by use of additional
This can be avoided by use of additional criteria, e.g. criteria, e.g. SUBJECT DATE vs. REVERSE SUBJECT REVERSE
SUBJECT DATE vs. REVERSE SUBJECT REVERSE DATE. In general, DATE. In general, however, it's better (and faster, if the
however, it's better (and faster, if the client has a client has a "reverse current ordering" command) to reverse
"reverse current ordering" command) to reverse the results the results in the client instead of issuing a new SORT.
in the client instead of issuing a new SORT.
SIZE SIZE
Size of the message in octets. Size of the message in octets.
SUBJECT SUBJECT
Base subject text. Base subject text.
TO TO
RFC-822 local-part of the first "To" address. RFC-822 local-part of the first "To" address.
Example: C: A282 SORT (SUBJECT) UTF-8 SINCE 1-Feb-1994 Example: C: A282 SORT (SUBJECT) UTF-8 SINCE 1-Feb-1994
S: * SORT 2 84 882 S: * SORT 2 84 882
S: A282 OK SORT completed S: A282 OK SORT completed
C: A283 SORT (SUBJECT REVERSE DATE) UTF-8 ALL C: A283 SORT (SUBJECT REVERSE DATE) UTF-8 ALL
S: * SORT 5 3 4 1 2 S: * SORT 5 3 4 1 2
S: A283 OK SORT completed S: A283 OK SORT completed
C: A284 SORT (SUBJECT) US-ASCII TEXT "not in mailbox" C: A284 SORT (SUBJECT) US-ASCII TEXT "not in mailbox"
S: * SORT S: * SORT
S: A284 OK SORT completed S: A284 OK SORT completed
6.3.THREAD. THREAD Command
Arguments: threading algorithm
charset specification
searching criteria (one or more)
Data: untagged responses: THREAD
Result: OK - thread completed
NO - thread error: can't thread that charset or
criteria
BAD - command unknown or arguments invalid
The THREAD command is a variant of SEARCH with threading semantics
for the results. Thread has two arguments before the searching
criteria argument; a threading algorithm, and the searching
charset.
Note that unlike SEARCH, the searching charset argument is
mandatory. The US-ASCII and UTF-8 charsets MUST be implemented.
All other charsets are optional.
There is also a UID THREAD command which corresponds to THREAD the
way that UID SEARCH corresponds to SEARCH.
The THREAD command first searches the mailbox for messages that
match the given searching criteria using the charset argument for
the interpretation of strings in the searching criteria. It then
returns the matching messages in an untagged THREAD response,
threaded according to the specified threading algorithm.
Sorting is in ascending order. Earlier dates sort before later
dates; smaller sizes sort before larger sizes; and strings are
sorted according to ascending values established by their
collation algorithm (see under "Internationalization
Considerations").
The defined threading algorithms are as follows:
ORDEREDSUBJECT
The ORDEREDSUBJECT threading algorithm is also referred to as
"poor man's threading." The searched messages are sorted by
base subject and then by the sent date. The messages are then
split into separate threads, with each thread containing
messages with the same base subject text. Finally, the threads
are sorted by the sent date of the first message in the thread.
The first message of each thread are siblings of each other
(the "root"). The second message of a thread is the child of
the first message, and subsequent messages of the thread are
siblings of the second message and hence children of the
message at the root. Hence, there are no grandchildren in
ORDEREDSUBJECT threading.
Note: earlier versions of this specification specified
that each message in an ORDEREDSUBJECT thread is a child
(as opposed to a sibling) of the previous message. This
is now deprecated. For compatibility with servers which
may still use the old definition, client implementations
SHOULD treat descendents of a child as being siblings of
that child.
This is because the old definition mistakenly indicated
that there was a parent/child relationship between
successive messages in a thread; when in fact there was
only a chronological relationship. In clients which
indicate parent/child relationships in a thread tree,
this would indicate levels of descent which did not
exist.
REFERENCES
The REFERENCES threading algorithm is based on the [THREADING]
algorithm written used in "Netscape Mail and News" versions 2.0
through 3.0. This algorithm threads the searched messages by
grouping them together in parent/child relationships based on
which messages are replies to others. The parent/child
relationships are built using two methods: reconstructing a
message's ancestry using the references contained within it;
and checking the original (not base) subject of a message to
see if it is a reply to (or forward of) another message.
Note: "Message ID" in the following description refers to a
normalized form of the msg-id in [RFC 2822]. The actual
text in an RFC 2822 may use quoting, resulting in multiple
ways of expressing the same Message ID. Implementations of
the REFERENCES threading algorithm MUST normalize any msg-id
in order to avoid false non-matches due to differences in
quoting.
For example, the msg-id
<"01KF8JCEOCBS0045PS"@xxx.yyy.com>
and the msg-id
<01KF8JCEOCBS0045PS@xxx.yyy.com>
MUST be interpreted as being the same Message ID.
The references used for reconstructing a message's ancestry are
found using the following rules:
If a message contains a [NEWS]-style References header line,
then use the Message IDs in the References header line as
the references.
If a message does not contain a References header line, or
the References header line does not contain any valid
Message IDs, then use the first (if any) valid Message ID
found in the In-Reply-To header line as the only reference
(parent) for this message.
Note: Although [RFC 2822] permits multiple Message IDs in
the In-Reply-To header, in actual practice this
discipline has not been followed. For example,
In-Reply-To headers have been observed with email
addresses after the Message ID, and there are no good
heuristics for software to determine the difference.
This is not a problem with the References header however.
If a message does not contain an In-Reply-To header line, or
the In-Reply-To header line does not contain a valid Message
ID, then the message does not have any references (NIL).
A message is considered to be a reply or forward if the base
subject extraction rules, applied to the original subject,
remove any of the following: a subj-refwd, a "(fwd)"
subj-trailer, or a subj-fwd-hdr and subj-fwd-trl.
The REFERENCES algorithm is significantly more complex than
ORDEREDSUBJECT and consists of six main steps. These steps are
outlined in detail below.
(1) For each searched message:
(A) Using the Message IDs in the message's references, link
the corresponding messages (those whose Message-ID header
line contains the given reference Message ID) together as
parent/child. Make the first reference the parent of the
second (and the second a child of the first), the second the
parent of the third (and the third a child of the second),
etc. The following rules govern the creation of these
links:
If a message does not contain a Message-ID header line,
or the Message-ID header line does not contain a valid
Message ID, then assign a unique Message ID to this
message.
If two or more messages have the same Message ID, assign
a unique Message ID to each of the duplicates.
If no message can be found with a given Message ID,
create a dummy message with this ID. Use this dummy
message for all subsequent references to this ID.
If a message already has a parent, don't change the
existing link. This is done because the References
header line may have been truncated by a MUA. As a
result, there is no guarantee that the messages
corresponding to adjacent Message IDs in the References
header line are parent and child.
Do not create a parent/child link if creating that link
would introduce a loop. For example, before making
message A the parent of B, make sure that A is not a
descendent of B.
Note: Message ID comparisons are case-sensitive.
(B) Create a parent/child link between the last reference
(or NIL if there are no references) and the current message.
If the current message already has a parent, it is probably
the result of a truncated References header line, so break
the current parent/child link before creating the new
correct one. As in step 1.A, do not create the parent/child
link if creating that link would introduce a loop. Note
that if this message has no references, that it will now
have no parent.
Note: The parent/child links created in steps 1.A and 1.B
MUST be kept consistent with one another at ALL times.
(2) Gather together all of the messages that have no parents
and make them all children (siblings of one another) of a dummy
parent (the "root"). These messages constitute the first
(head) message of the threads created thus far.
(3) Prune dummy messages from the thread tree. Traverse each
thread under the root, and for each message:
If it is a dummy message with NO children, delete it.
If it is a dummy message with children, delete it, but
promote its children to the current level. In other words,
splice them in with the dummy's siblings.
Do not promote the children if doing so would make them
children of the root, unless there is only one child.
(4) Sort the messages under the root (top-level siblings only)
by sent date. In the case of an exact match on sent date or if
either of the Date: headers used in a comparison can not be
parsed, use the order in which the messages appear in the
mailbox (that is, by sequence number) to determine the order.
In the case of a dummy message, sort its children by sent date
and then use the first child for the top-level sort.
(5) Gather together messages under the root that have the same
base subject text.
(A) Create a table for associating base subjects with
messages, called the subject table.
(B) Populate the subject table with one message per each
base subject. For each child of the root:
(i) Find the subject of this thread, by using the base
subject from either the current message or its first
child if the current message is a dummy. This is the
thread subject.
(ii) If the thread subject is empty, skip this message.
(iii) Look up the message associated with the thread
subject in the subject table.
(iv) If there is no message in the subject table with the
thread subject, add the current message and the thread
subject to the subject table.
Otherwise, if the message in the subject table is not a
dummy, AND either of the following criteria are true:
The current message is a dummy, OR
The message in the subject table is a reply or forward
and the current message is not.
then replace the message in the subject table with the
current message.
(C) Merge threads with the same thread subject. For each
child of the root:
(i) Find the message's thread subject as in step 5.B.i
above.
(ii) If the thread subject is empty, skip this message.
(iii) Lookup the message associated with this thread
subject in the subject table.
(iv) If the message in the subject table is the current
message, skip this message.
Otherwise, merge the current message with the one in the
subject table using the following rules:
If both messages are dummies, append the current
message's children to the children of the message in
the subject table (the children of both messages
become siblings), and then delete the current message.
If the message in the subject table is a dummy and the
current message is not, make the current message a
child of the message in the subject table (a sibling
of its children).
If the current message is a reply or forward and the
message in the subject table is not, make the current
message a child of the message in the subject table (a
sibling of its children).
Otherwise, create a new dummy message and make both
the current message and the message in the subject
table children of the dummy. Then replace the message
in the subject table with the dummy message.
Note: Subject comparisons are case-insensitive, as
described under "Internationalization
Considerations."
(6) Traverse the messages under the root and sort each set of
siblings by sent date. Traverse the messages in such a way
that the "youngest" set of siblings are sorted first, and the
"oldest" set of siblings are sorted last (grandchildren are
sorted before children, etc). In the case of an exact match on
sent date or if either of the Date: headers used in a
comparison can not be parsed, use the order in which the
messages appear in the mailbox (that is, by sequence number) to
determine the order. In the case of a dummy message (which can
only occur with top-level siblings), use its first child for
sorting.
Example: C: A283 THREAD ORDEREDSUBJECT UTF-8 SINCE 5-MAR-2000
S: * THREAD (166)(167)(168)(169)(172)(170)(171)
(173)(174 (175)(176)(178)(181)(180))(179)(177
(183)(182)(188)(184)(185)(186)(187)(189))(190)
(191)(192)(193)(194 195)(196 (197)(198))(199)
(200 202)(201)(203)(204)(205)(206 207)(208)
S: A283 OK THREAD completed
C: A284 THREAD ORDEREDSUBJECT US-ASCII TEXT "gewp"
S: * THREAD
S: A284 OK THREAD completed
C: A285 THREAD REFERENCES UTF-8 SINCE 5-MAR-2000
S: * THREAD (166)(167)(168)(169)(172)((170)(179))
(171)(173)((174)(175)(176)(178)(181)(180))
((177)(183)(182)(188 (184)(189))(185 186)(187))
(190)(191)(192)(193)((194)(195 196))(197 198)
(199)(200 202)(201)(203)(204)(205 206 207)(208)
S: A285 OK THREAD completed
Note: The line breaks in the first and third client
responses are for editorial clarity and do not appear in
real THREAD responses.
Additional Responses Additional Responses
This response is an extension to the IMAP4rev1 base protocol. This response is an extension to the IMAP4rev1 base protocol.
The section heading of this response is intended to correspond with The section heading of this response is intended to correspond with
where it would be located in the main document. where it would be located in the main document.
7.2.SORT. SORT Response 7.2.SORT. SORT Response
Data: zero or more numbers Data: zero or more numbers
The SORT response occurs as a result of a SORT or UID SORT The SORT response occurs as a result of a SORT or UID SORT
command. The number(s) refer to those messages that match the command. The number(s) refer to those messages that match the
search criteria. For SORT, these are message sequence numbers; search criteria. For SORT, these are message sequence numbers;
for UID SORT, these are unique identifiers. Each number is for UID SORT, these are unique identifiers. Each number is
delimited by a space. delimited by a space.
Example: S: * SORT 2 3 6 Example: S: * SORT 2 3 6
Formal Syntax of SORT commands and Responses 7.2.THREAD. THREAD Response
Data: zero or more threads
The THREAD response occurs as a result of a THREAD or UID THREAD
command. It contains zero or more threads. A thread consists of
a parenthesized list of thread members.
Thread members consist of zero or more message numbers, delimited
by spaces, indicating successive parent and child. This continues
until the thread splits into multiple sub-threads, at which point
the thread nests into multiple sub-threads with the first member
of each subthread being siblings at this level. There is no limit
to the nesting of threads.
The messages numbers refer to those messages that match the search
criteria. For THREAD, these are message sequence numbers; for UID
THREAD, these are unique identifiers.
Example: S: * THREAD (2)(3 6 (4 23)(44 7 96))
The first thread consists only of message 2. The second thread
consists of the messages 3 (parent) and 6 (child), after which it
splits into two subthreads; the first of which contains messages 4
(child of 6, sibling of 44) and 23 (child of 4), and the second of
which contains messages 44 (child of 6, sibling of 4), 7 (child of
44), and 96 (child of 7). Since some later messages are parents
of earlier messages, the messages were probably moved from some
other mailbox at different times.
-- 2
-- 3
\-- 6
|-- 4
| \-- 23
|
\-- 44
\-- 7
\-- 96
Example: S: * THREAD ((3)(5))
In this example, 3 and 5 are siblings of a parent which does not
match the search criteria (and/or does not exist in the mailbox);
however they are members of the same thread.
Formal Syntax of SORT and THREAD commands and Responses
sort-data = "SORT" *(SP nz-number) sort-data = "SORT" *(SP nz-number)
sort = ["UID" SP] "SORT" SP sort = ["UID" SP] "SORT" SP
"(" sort-criterion *(SP sort-criterion) ")" "(" sort-criterion *(SP sort-criterion) ")"
SP search-charset 1*(SP search-key) SP search-charset 1*(SP search-key)
sort-criterion = ["REVERSE" SP] sort-key sort-criterion = ["REVERSE" SP] sort-key
sort-key = "ARRIVAL" / "CC" / "DATE" / "FROM" / "SIZE" / sort-key = "ARRIVAL" / "CC" / "DATE" / "FROM" / "SIZE" /
"SUBJECT" / "TO" "SUBJECT" / "TO"
thread-data = "THREAD" [SP 1*thread-list]
thread-list = "(" thread-members / thread-nested ")"
thread-members = nz-number *(SP nz-number) [SP thread-nested]
thread-nested = 2*thread-list
thread = ["UID" SP] "THREAD" SP thread-algorithm
SP search-charset 1*(SP search-key)
thread-algorithm = "ORDEREDSUBJECT" / "REFERENCES" / atom
The following syntax describes base subject extraction rules (2)-(6): The following syntax describes base subject extraction rules (2)-(6):
subject = *subj-leader [subj-middle] *subj-trailer subject = *subj-leader [subj-middle] *subj-trailer
subj-refwd = ("re" / ("fw" ["d"])) *WSP [subj-blob] ":" subj-refwd = ("re" / ("fw" ["d"])) *WSP [subj-blob] ":"
subj-blob = "[" *BLOBCHAR "]" *WSP subj-blob = "[" *BLOBCHAR "]" *WSP
subj-fwd = subj-fwd-hdr subject subj-fwd-trl subj-fwd = subj-fwd-hdr subject subj-fwd-trl
skipping to change at page 9, line 7 skipping to change at page 17, line 15
; can be a subj-blob ; can be a subj-blob
BLOBCHAR = %x01-5a / %x5c / %x5e-7f BLOBCHAR = %x01-5a / %x5c / %x5e-7f
; any CHAR except '[' and ']' ; any CHAR except '[' and ']'
NONWSP = %x01-08 / %x0a-1f / %x21-7f NONWSP = %x01-08 / %x0a-1f / %x21-7f
; any CHAR other than WSP ; any CHAR other than WSP
Security Considerations Security Considerations
Security issues are not discussed in this memo. The SORT and THREAD extensions do not raise any security
considerations that are not present in the base [IMAP] protocol, and
these issues are discussed in [IMAP]. Nevertheless, it is important
to remember that IMAP4rev1 protocol transactions, including
electronic mail data, are sent in the clear over the network unless
protection from snooping is negotiated, either by the use of
STARTTLS, privacy protection is negotiated in the AUTHENTICATE
command, or some other protection mechanism is in effect.
Internationalization Considerations Internationalization Considerations
Prior to doing any string collation, all strings must be prepared as
described in [STRINGPREP].
;;; NEED TO DEFINE A STRINGPREP PROFILE HERE.
By default, strings are sorted according to the "minimum sorting By default, strings are sorted according to the "minimum sorting
collation algorithm". All implementations of SORT MUST implement the collation algorithm". All implementations of SORT MUST implement the
minimum sorting collation algorithm. minimum sorting collation algorithm.
In the minimum sorting collation algorithm, the Basic Latin In the minimum sorting collation algorithm, the Basic Latin
alphabetics (U+0041 to U+005A uppercase, U+0061 to U+007A lowercase) alphabetics (U+0041 to U+005A uppercase, U+0061 to U+007A lowercase)
are sorted in a case-insensitive fashion; that is, "A" (U+0041) and are sorted in a case-insensitive fashion; that is, "A" (U+0041) and
"a" (U+0061) are treated as exact equals. The characters U+005B to "a" (U+0061) are treated as exact equals. The characters U+005B to
U+0060 are sorted after the Basic Latin alphabetics; for example, U+0060 are sorted after the Basic Latin alphabetics; for example,
U+005E is sorted after U+005A and U+007A. All other characters are U+005E is sorted after U+005A and U+007A. All other characters are
skipping to change at page 9, line 34 skipping to change at page 18, line 7
Note: this means, among other things, that the composed Note: this means, among other things, that the composed
characters in the Latin-1 Supplement are not compared in characters in the Latin-1 Supplement are not compared in
what would be considered an ISO 8859-1 "case-insensitive" what would be considered an ISO 8859-1 "case-insensitive"
fashion. Case comparison rules for characters with fashion. Case comparison rules for characters with
diacriticals differ between languages; the minimum sorting diacriticals differ between languages; the minimum sorting
collation does not attempt to deal with this at all. This collation does not attempt to deal with this at all. This
is reserved for other sorting collations, which may be is reserved for other sorting collations, which may be
language-specific. language-specific.
;;; *** ITEM FOR DISCUSSION *** ;;; THIS PROBLEM CAN BE AVOIDED WITH THE RIGHT STRINGPREP PROFILE.
;;; THERE IS SOME CONCERN THAT THIS MINIMUM COLLATION IS TOO MINIMAL,
;;; AND THAT THE "GENERIC UNICODE SORTING COLLATION" DISCUSSED BELOW
;;; NEEDS TO BE THE MINIMUM. ONE SUGGESTION IS UNICODE TECHNICAL
;;; STANDARD 10 (TR-10). IF THIS IS THE MINIMUM, THAT REQUIRES THAT
;;; ALL IMPLEMENTATIONS OF SORT AND THREAD BE UNICODE-SAVVY AT LEAST
;;; TO THE POINT OF IMPLEMENTATION TR-10. IS THIS REALISTIC? DOES
;;; THIS RAISE EXCESSIVE IMPLEMENTATION BARRIERS?
Other sorting collations, and the ability to change the sorting Other sorting collations, and the ability to change the sorting
collation, will be defined in a separate document dealing with IMAP collation, will be defined in a separate document dealing with IMAP
internationalization. internationalization.
It is anticipated that there will be a generic Unicode sorting
collation, which will provide generic case-insensitivity for
alphabetic scripts, specification of composed character handling, and
language-specific sorting collations. A server which implements
non-default sorting collations will modify its sorting behavior
according to the selected sorting collation.
Non-English translations of "Re" or "Fw"/"Fwd" are not specified for Non-English translations of "Re" or "Fw"/"Fwd" are not specified for
removal in the base subject extraction process. By specifying that removal in the base subject extraction process. By specifying that
only the English forms of the prefixes are used, it becomes a simple only the English forms of the prefixes are used, it becomes a simple
display time task to localize the prefix language for the user. If, display time task to localize the prefix language for the user. If,
on the other hand, prefixes in multiple languages are permitted, the on the other hand, prefixes in multiple languages are permitted, the
result is a geometrically complex, and ultimately unimplementable, result is a geometrically complex, and ultimately unimplementable,
task. In order to improve the ability to support non-English display task. In order to improve the ability to support non-English display
in Internet mail clients, only the English form of these prefixes in Internet mail clients, only the English form of these prefixes
should be transmitted in Internet mail messages. should be transmitted in Internet mail messages.
12. IANA Considerations
IMAP4 capabilities are registered by publishing a standards track or
IESG approved experimental RFC. The registry is currently located
at:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/imap4-capabilities
In addition, additional threading algorithms also need to be
registered with IANA.
A. References
The following documents are normative to this document:
[ABNF] Crocker, D., and Overell, P. "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997.
[IMAP] Crispin, M., "Internet Message Access Protocol - Version
4rev1", RFC 2060, December 1996.
[KEYWORDS] Bradner, S. "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, Harvard University, March 1997.
[NEWS] Horton, M., and Adams, R., "Standard for interchange of USENET
messages", RFC-1036, AT&T Bell Laboratories and Center for Seismic
Studies, December, 1987.
[RFC-2822] Resnick, P. "Internet Message Format", RFC 2822, April
2001.
[STRINGPREP] Hoffman, P., and Blanchet, M. "Preparation of
Internationalized Strings ("stringprep"), Work In Progress.
[THREADING] Zawinski, J. "message threading",
http://www.jwz.org/doc/threading.html, 1997-2002.
Author's Address Author's Address
Mark R. Crispin Mark R. Crispin
Networks and Distributed Computing Networks and Distributed Computing
University of Washington University of Washington
4545 15th Avenue NE 4545 15th Avenue NE
Seattle, WA 98105-4527 Seattle, WA 98105-4527
Phone: (206) 543-5762 Phone: (206) 543-5762
 End of changes. 

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.23, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/