[Ietf-calsify] summary of issues discussed in the jabber session

[Lisa Dusseault]

On Dec 14, 2006, at 2:38 AM, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:

>>
>> RFC2445 won't go away,
>
> Sure, it will still be rfc 2445, but it will be marked as  
> deprecated and
> superseded by 2445bis, which does no longer allow these  
> recurrences, right?

Maybe.  That's one option which would make the document appear to be  
easier to read, which might be good PR.  I've heard from some  
implementors before that they wouldn't do recurrences at all because  
it was all too complicated. While I think that's a bogus objection,  
it might be expedient to make some compromise.

Another option is to move the "extended recurrence rules" features to  
a separate section with health warnings and a discussion of  
applicability.

Another option is to keep the full recur rule features in RFC  
2445bis, but in iTIP -- which explains how to use iCalendar it for  
interpersonal scheduling anyway -- rule out certain features (make  
them illegal in scheduling requests).  This has two potential  
drawbacks depending on your view:
	- makes RFC2445bis just about as complicated as RFC2445 (would  
probably end up longer as we add more explanation!) and just as   
daunting to readers/implementors, even if they don't have to  
implement quite as much any more
	- doesn't address calendar export/import.  Is it reasonable to  
expect that all personal calendar applications should be able to  
import, display, and allow the user to edit, VEVENTS with recurrences  
such as "every five minutes"?

Lisa
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/ietf-calsify/attachments/20061214/b1a17f67/attachment-0001.html