AD review issue #4: Supporting both VTODO and VEVENT in thesame iCalendar stream (was: Re: [Ietf-calsify] Re: AD review on2445bis )

Reinhold Kainhofer reinhold at kainhofer.com
Mon Sep 8 15:46:27 PDT 2008


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Am Dienstag, 9. September 2008 schrieb Tim Hare:
> I thought the very definiton of x-properties was that they were
> 'experimental' and as such not "properly" part of the specification which
> needed to be handled by all conforming pieces of software.  I think that
> they should be ignored, but not necessarily discarded - if a CUA creates an
> iCalendar object with x- properties and asks a CS to store it, AND the CS
> does not recognize those x-properties it should still, in opinion, store
> them but take no action on them or because of them.

I completely agree, that's why I find the word "ignore" not ideal.
I just wanted to point out that "ignore" might possibly be misunderstood 
as "feel free to discard them". It makes a difference if you ignore a 
property/parameter on reading (i.e. don't parse it at all and thus also not 
save it) or ignore it on processing (i.e. it's there but you don't do 
anything with it).
This also applies to the issues #79 of my review of rfc2446bis-07.

Cheers,
Reinhold
- -- 
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Reinhold Kainhofer, Vienna University of Technology, Austria
email: reinhold at kainhofer.com, http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/
 * Financial and Actuarial Mathematics, TU Wien, http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/
 * K Desktop Environment, http://www.kde.org, KOrganizer maintainer
 * Chorvereinigung "Jung-Wien", http://www.jung-wien.at/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIxatHTqjEwhXvPN0RAmdtAJ9wTQmAF+pdKJq+XNkF/hoo7W9ExACg19Cu
LH3jiBSyM2Inr2Dp9Z8SMyQ=
=Uy5C
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the Ietf-calsify mailing list