[Ietf-calsify] (no subject)
helge.hess at opengroupware.org
Wed Oct 13 04:15:13 PDT 2004
On Oct 13, 2004, at 8:12, <Veikko.Punkka at nokia.com> wrote:
> If you now start sending each occurence as a single VEVENT
> with some other thing to keep them related (not necessarily supported
> by current clients), how do you think that will make you reach
The huge majority of available systems are not interoperable at all.
Reducing complexity will make it much easier for those systems to
implement iCal and to ensure interoperability at a certain level. This
level might not be sufficient for you, but it will improve the
situation for a lot of other users of scheduling software.
On the other side we should not break existing applications (you are
certainly correct that some implementations probably support 100% of
RRULE's). IMHO if we remove RRULE's from the core spec, we should _at
the same time_ have an extension spec available which implements
Besides that it would be _really_ useful to have a (maintained) chart
which outlines what RRULE features are supported by what
implementation. So far I have only seen pretty broad statements like "4
of 5 implements X".
More information about the Ietf-calsify