[Dev] Re: [Cosmo] Apple iCal & cosmo-demo
sheila at osafoundation.org
Tue Mar 7 17:09:29 PST 2006
So it looks like we have a couple of options if we want to make this
1. We could just do http and not https.
2. We could continue to offer access over http, and give users 3
urls, 1 for ical specifically.
Could someone comment on the technical tradeoffs for both solutions?
For example, what is the downside if we use http (port 80) rather
On Mar 7, 2006, at 10:49 AM, Morgen Sagen wrote:
> 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
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
> Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
More information about the cosmo-dev