[Dev] Re: [Cosmo] Apple iCal & cosmo-demo
morgen at osafoundation.org
Tue Mar 7 10:49:01 PST 2006
On Mar 7, 2006, at 9:31 AM, Charles Wyble wrote:
> Lisa Dusseault wrote:
>> On Mar 6, 2006, at 12:17 PM, Morgen Sagen wrote:
>>> I don't think Chandler should assume that there will be a port 80
>>> ('http') server along with the port 443 ('https') server, and
>>> that they both refer to the same Cosmo instance. I'm not sure
>>> how Chandler could know this in a general way, without having
>>> site-specific logic (in other words, "if host == 'cosmo-demo'
>>> then port 443 is equivalent to 80") inside Chandler. It's
>>> perhaps unusual that cosmo-demo is set up this way, and I
>>> wouldn't count on it. I would be interested to hear what other
>>> people think.
> Well this isn't entirely true. Its not Chandler thats the problem
> but Apple ICAL. They evidently don't support https. So the logic
> would actually need to be inside Cosmo no? To detect the client and
> do different things.
Well, yes and no. It affects Chandler because we have a feature
which allows you to copy a shared collection's URL to the clipboard
so that you can paste it into either an email message (to invite
someone to subscribe) or to another client (such as iCal). The
original question was if Chandler could somehow generate the 'iCal
friendly' URL in this situation, and I think it's unfortunately 'no'
since it's unlikely there *will* be such a non-HTTPS URL (although
there happens to be one now on cosmo-demo, which was news to me).
It is really unfortunate Apple removed HTTPS support for iCal (which
apparently happened quite recently). I guess we have to ask
ourselves if we want to just use regular HTTP (port 80) rather than
More information about the chandler-dev