[Ietf-calsify] Re: What's wrong with more radical simplification?

Helge Hess helge.hess at opengroupware.org
Fri Feb 11 09:39:24 PST 2005

On Feb 11, 2005, at 18:28, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
>> Thats a rather weird statement. Why can't you use the extensions? If
>> the "other" client supports them, he will have additional information,
>> if not, he will fall back to the base spec.
> Yes, exactly. And that is the problem here.
> If you move recurrence information to the extension and you use a 
> recurrence,
> any client which does not understand that recurrence extension will 
> just show
> the very first occurrence but none of the other occurrences.

Why is that? The client will show a sequence of connected events, it 
just doesn't know the algorithm the sequence was built with.

> So, to be sure that the receiving client really shows all occurrences 
> one
> can't use the recurrence extension at all. Doesn't make too much 
> sense, does
> it?

No, but it isn't the way you describe it.

The events are still connected, the idea was not to remove the 
connection between the events but to remove the pretty complex rrule 
language. The latter would have the additional advantage that we could 
also drop timezones for the basic spec (another huge complication).
But all this was already discussed some month ago?


More information about the Ietf-calsify mailing list