Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Dec 2012 00:03 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 545590
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
but that still makes them non-standard proprietary extensions that Google can change on a whim.
Non-standard, Yes. Proprietary, no.
Google don't "own" these extensions and there are no licenses, restrictions or fees associated with implementing them.
Besides, many things now considered "standard" started out as non-standard.
It's also worth noting that IMAP was designed to be extensible.
Edited 2012-12-18 06:40 UTC
If you equate "public" with "open", then you may be correct.
I however like to think that "open" means that anybody can participate in the process of developing the protocol. This is not the case here, the protocol is decreed by Google.
Secrecy, fees (e.g. due to patent encumbrance) and such are sufficient conditions for being proprietary, but not necessary.





Member since:
2006-06-18
They may be documented, but that still makes them non-standard proprietary extensions that Google can change on a whim.
That said, IMAP IDLE is a supported open standard that allows push, so no excuse for Microsoft shunning it.