Subject: [sieve] I-D Action:draft-ietf-sieve-convert-00.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 09:45:01 -0700 (PDT)

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Sieve Mail Filtering Language Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : Sieve Extension for converting messages before delivery
	Author(s)       : A. Melnikov, Q. Sun
	Filename        : draft-ietf-sieve-convert-00.txt
	Pages           : 5
	Date            : 2010-06-24

This document describes how Lemonade CONVERT can be used to transform
messages before final delivery.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sieve-convert-00.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 16:34:59 -0400

>        Filename        : draft-ietf-sieve-convert-00.txt
...
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sieve-convert-00.txt

Comments:

Abstract: Should change "Lemonade CONVERT" to "IMAP CONVERT".

anchor3: There will certainly be plenty of cases when only some parts
need to be converted, and there might be cases when different parts
should be converted differently.  But I'm not sure a Sieve script will
be able to discern those cases often enough for it to be worth the
complexity of putting that into the language.  Except...

anchor4: ...perhaps in the interaction with MIME loops.  If a script
is iterating the MIME parts, perhaps then it makes sense to do
conversions one part at a time.

Also, you have ":converted" as an argument only to "fileinto" (and
perhaps to "replace" in MIME loops), but there are no tests that can
use conversions.  It's possible that a script might want to test a
converted part (particularly if the conversion is to text/plain, say).
 Is it worth providing for that?

Again, perhaps the complexity of that isn't worth it.

Barry