Small extension to the annotate proposal

[Stuart K. Bingë]

On Monday, 12 July 2004 14:59, Martin Konold wrote:
> > I thought we said that such an annotation would only help _writing_ to
> > the folder. When reading from it, the contents make it clear how to
> > handle them (either by looking at the mimetype of the attachments or by
> > looking at the extra header discussed in the other thread).
>
> Yes, exactly! According to my understanding the annotation is used for
> writing but the actual message is used for reading. When reading the actual
> mime type determines the type while an extra option header might hint the
> reader (for efficiency).

If that is the case, then is the annotation even necessary? You could 
potentially ignore it, write whatever data you want, and still be considered 
"compliant", as all clients have to parse every message anyway to see if they 
can handle it (and if they can't, they have to preserve it). Granted, it will 
probably happen that most clients won't be able to handle your data if you're 
doing that, but then again you have no obligation to understand their format 
either.

Maybe something like "/recommended-storage-format" would be more appropriate?

-- 
Stuart Bingë
Code Fusion cc.

Office: +27 11 673 0411
Mobile: +27 83 298 9727
Email: s.binge at codefusion.co.za

Tailored email solutions; Kolab specialists.
http://www.codefusion.co.za/