[Ietf-calsify] Re: What's wrong with more radical simplification?
helge.hess at opengroupware.org
Fri Feb 11 11:09:06 PST 2005
On 11. Feb 2005, at 19:57 Uhr, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
> Yes, but the problem is that the list of RDATEs is not only the result
> the RRULE, but it might also contain additional dates, which are
> already in
> the "old" RDATE list according to rfc2445.
> E.g. if a file contains:
> Then the recurrence rule is every sunday, but the rdate list also
> contains an
> additional occurrence on Feb 16.
If this is a real world problem (say: more than one, non-MS
implementation actively uses this construct), we obviously need some
solution to this (eg a seperate field for one or the other).
More information about the Ietf-calsify