[Design] Re: [chandler-users] Jon Udell article on subscribing to Google Calendar from Outlook

[Bobby Rullo]

+1 on pretty much everything you said.


On Feb 5, 2007, at 10:57 AM, Mimi Yin wrote:

> I think that's where I would prefer to have it be something more  
> 'concrete' than WebDAV. e.g. specific services/destinations (e.g.  
> Flickr) that users understand. That being said, there will also be  
> a place for identifying accounts by technology, probably in an  
> advanced area. I think the model we have today for the 'Subscribe'  
> pulldown is a good place to start. We listed a few of the most  
> 'likely' clients users can subscribe with, that we support and then  
> have an advanced area for users using other clients who are can  
> figure how to subscribe for themselves.
>
> Mimi
>
> On Feb 5, 2007, at 10:31 AM, Bobby Rullo wrote:
>
>> I see. The main way that cosmo and chandler will talk in the  
>> future will be a new protocol - not WebDAV. So that's the one you  
>> would call Sharing Server or "Cosmo Server" or "Chandler Server"  
>> or whatever else we coem up with.
>>
>> However, if you offer the ability to share to a generic WebDAV  
>> server you must call it WebDAV somewhere. Same goes for stuff in  
>> the Cosmo collection details dialog box - if you offer certain  
>> protocols to be used they must be called by their real names  
>> somewhere.
>>
>>
>> On Feb 5, 2007, at 10:24 AM, Mimi Yin wrote:
>>
>>> For now, Chandler. But I can see for both eventually.
>>>
>>> On Feb 2, 2007, at 3:55 PM, Bobby Rullo wrote:
>>>
>>>> Are you talking about in Cosmo or in Chandler? I thought you  
>>>> were talking about Cosmo.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 2, 2007, at 3:32 PM, Mimi Yin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Heh, do you have another suggestion?
>>>>>
>>>>> I mean in the future we potentially have all kinds of accounts:
>>>>>
>>>>> + Email (accounts)
>>>>> + IM (accounts)
>>>>> + Voice (accounts)
>>>>> + Amazon (accounts)
>>>>> + .Mac  (accounts)
>>>>> + Exchange  (accounts)
>>>>> etc...
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think we want to be talking about VoIP versus SIP. We  
>>>>> want to say voice and then have a list of clients to choose  
>>>>> from. (Yes I realize, voice clients also do IM and chat and  
>>>>> whatnot. Sigh.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, I think the current proposal is to call it just Sharing.  
>>>>> You don't actually choose between Cosmo Sharing and WebDAV per se.
>>>>> http://wiki.osafoundation.org/Journal/AccountSetupWorkflow
>>>>>
>>>>> Mimi
>>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 2, 2007, at 3:20 PM, Bobby Rullo wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + Outlook also provides 2 different ways to Publish/Share. 1  
>>>>>>> within the Windows Live network. (Although it doesn't say  
>>>>>>> that anywhere in the description, it's called Office Online  
>>>>>>> instead.) And a second via WebDAV. What's WebDAV? (We have  
>>>>>>> this option too :o( I wonder if we could call it 'Sharing  
>>>>>>> Server' instead.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you did that, then instead of just technology-savvy people  
>>>>>> understanding what you were talking about, no one would.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>>>>
>>>> Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
>>>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
>>>
>>
>> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>>
>> Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/attachments/20070205/9c41388c/attachment.htm