[Cosmo-dev] Re: changing the format of modification recurrence-ids in eim

[Brian Moseley]

On 5/8/07, Grant Baillie <grant at osafoundation.org> wrote:

> Sounds fine to me, though I'd be a little more in favour of something
> like:
>
> f2953300-6fcb-4547-ad7b-22e193b6903f:20070511T090000Z
>
> (i.e. an ISO UTC date-time rather than a timestamp). But, either way.

the timestamp looks a little more like an opaque string, which i tend
to favor for a uuid since it doesn't imply (or implies less strongly)
what data the uuid is actually based on, so that's my slight
preference, but i can go either way as well.