On Friday, November 2 at 04:50 PM, quoth Timo Sirainen:
On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 14:31 -0500, Kyle Wheeler wrote:
On Sunday, October 28 at 03:16 AM, quoth Timo Sirainen:
- SORT: If Date: header is missing or broken, fallback to using INTERNALDATE (as the SORT draft nowadays specifies).
Since this is a subject I looked at before, I'm rather curious. Where in the SORT draft does it say to fall back to INTERNALDATE?
Just search for INTERNALDATE :)
DATE Sent date and time from the Date: header, adjusted by time zone. This differs from the SENTON criteria in SEARCH, which uses just the date and not the time, nor adjusts by time zone. If the sent date can not be determined (a Date: header is missing or can not be parsed), the INTERNALDATE for that message is used as the sent date.
Very interesting... two different pages on the IETF's website have two different texts for version 19 of that draft. Odd.
Anyway, at best, it would seem that the text has multiple potential interpretations, because the parenthetical explanation there of what it means for a sent date to be un-determinable is different from (and contradictory of) what it says in section 2.2 (which is what I quoted).
Treating invalid time as 00:00:00 should probably be done at some point, but it's a pretty rare problem and also a SHOULD, not a MUST :)
I would tend to disagree - the draft says more than simply that invalid time must be treated as 00:00:00, but rather:
If there is no valid date or time, the date and time SHOULD be
treated as 00:00:00 on the earliest possible date.Thus, even if you fall back to INTERNALDATE, the time should be zeroed out. But you're right, it is a SHOULD rather than a MUST.
~Kyle
If God can work through me, he can work through anyone. -- St. Francis of Assisi