[Ietf-calsify] One last comment on exact vs. nominal durations
bernard.desruisseaux at oracle.com
Thu Sep 27 10:05:04 PDT 2007
I take my words back!
If one always want a nominal duration of 1 day (or N days)
then one should use DURATION instead.
Bernard Desruisseaux wrote:
> Jonathan is right. I wouldn't mind addressing this issue if
> someone wants to propose text.
> Eliot Lear wrote:
>> Jonathan Lennox wrote:
>>> One other issue occured to me on exact vs. nominal durations.
>>> The definition of RRULE says:
>>> If the duration of the recurring component is specified with the
>>> "DTEND" or "DUE" property, then the same exact duration will apply
>>> to all the members of the generated recurrence set.
>>> This is correct for DTEND or DUE specified with VALUE=DATE-TIME, but
>>> I think
>>> it's wrong for DTEND or DUE (and thus also DTSTART) with VALUE=DATE. In
>>> this latter case, I think it's clear that the desired outcome is always
>>> for the event to last a nominal number of days, not the exact
>>> duration of
>>> time of the first instance of the recurrence set.
>>> Is this worth addressing?
>> Ietf-calsify mailing list
>> Ietf-calsify at osafoundation.org
More information about the Ietf-calsify