[exim-cvs] cvs commit: exim/exim-doc/doc-txt README.SIEVE

Páxina inicial
Borrar esta mensaxe
Responder a esta mensaxe
Autor: Philip Hazel
Data:  
Para: exim-cvs
Asunto: [exim-cvs] cvs commit: exim/exim-doc/doc-txt README.SIEVE
ph10 2005/07/01 11:21:45 BST

  Modified files:
    exim-doc/doc-txt     README.SIEVE 
  Log:
  Minor patch to Sieve documentation.


  Revision  Changes    Path
  1.6       +2 -13     exim/exim-doc/doc-txt/README.SIEVE


  Index: README.SIEVE
  ===================================================================
  RCS file: /home/cvs/exim/exim-doc/doc-txt/README.SIEVE,v
  retrieving revision 1.5
  retrieving revision 1.6
  diff -u -r1.5 -r1.6
  --- README.SIEVE    17 Jun 2005 10:47:05 -0000    1.5
  +++ README.SIEVE    1 Jul 2005 10:21:45 -0000    1.6
  @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
  -$Cambridge: exim/exim-doc/doc-txt/README.SIEVE,v 1.5 2005/06/17 10:47:05 ph10 Exp $
  +$Cambridge: exim/exim-doc/doc-txt/README.SIEVE,v 1.6 2005/07/01 10:21:45 ph10 Exp $


                 Notes on the Sieve implementation for Exim


@@ -158,14 +158,6 @@
the Exim specification for details.


-Semantics of Redirect
-
-Sieve scripts are supposed to be interoperable between servers, so this
-implementation does not allow redirecting mail to unqualified addresses,
-because the domain would depend on the used system and on systems with
-virtual mail domains it is probably not what the user expects it to be.
-
-
String Arguments

There has been confusion if the string arguments to "require" are to be
@@ -181,13 +173,10 @@
RFC 3028 confuses syntax and semantics sometimes. It uses a generic
grammar as syntax for actions and tests and performs many checks during
semantic analysis. Syntax is specified as grammar rule, semantics
-with natural language, despire the latter often talking about syntax.
+with natural language, despite the latter often talking about syntax.
The intention was to provide a framework for the syntax that describes
current commands as well as future extensions, and describing commands
-by semantics. Since the semantic analysis is not specified by formal
-rules, it is easy to get that phase wrong, as demonstrated by the mistake
-in RFC 3028 to forbid "elsif" being followed by "elsif" (which is allowed
-in Sieve, it's just not specified correctly).
+by semantics.

RFC 3028 does not define if semantic checks are strict (always treat
unknown extensions as errors) or lazy (treat unknown extensions as error,