[Kroupware] Re: Kroupware RFC update

[Marc Mutz]

On Wednesday 30 April 2003 11:05, Hartmut Goebel wrote:
<snip>
> And how are you going to handle the conflic I descibed above?

Using IMAP namespaces would be ideal, iff servers already support 
arbitrary admin-specified namespaces. You snipped this part ;-)

> This problem only occurs whan using "normal" IMAP clients, which --
> in enterprise environment -- should affect only some "power users".

If you think this spec will be universally implemented, then you're 
dreaming. ;-) I don't see Outlook supporting this. Basically every 
clients that is tailored to a specific server (Outlook/Exchange, 
Lotus/Domino) will not bother to implement this. I don't see mutt 
supporting this. I don't see pine supporting this. Basically every 
stand-alone MUA will not bother to implement this. Why should it? IMAP 
is complex enough already, why should a MUA that can't handle iCal data 
anyway bother to detect magic folder names and provide localized names 
for them?

And if you think people don't use mutt or pine just because they are in 
an "enterprise environment", then go and have a look at what University 
people are using ;-)

Marc

-- 
The first casualty of war is the truth.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 192 bytes
Desc: signature
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kroupware/attachments/20030430/b2dc73e4/attachment.bin