[ietf-calsify] Clarification on DUE in TODO's in rfc2445bis

[Tim Hare]

It is possible, but in my opinion, that's a case where date AND time should
be used, making it easy to have the DUE value be later than the DTSTART
value.  


Tim Hare
Interested Bystander, Non-Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-calsify-bounces at osafoundation.org
[mailto:ietf-calsify-bounces at osafoundation.org] On Behalf Of Satya Vempati
Sent: Friday, September 04, 2009 7:08 PM
To: ietf-calsify at osafoundation.org
Subject: [ietf-calsify] Clarification on DUE in TODO's in rfc2445bis

According to the text in
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-calsify-rfc2445bis-10#section-3.8.2.3

	This property defines the date and time before which a
      to-do is expected to be completed.  For cases where this property
      is specified in a "VTODO" calendar component that also specifies a
      "DTSTART" property, the value type of this property MUST be the
      same as the "DTSTART" property, and the value of this property
      MUST be later in time than the value of the "DTSTART" property.
      Furthermore, this property MUST be specified as a date with local
      time if and only if the "DTSTART" property is also specified as a
      date with local time.

Does this mean that even when the DTSTART property type is DATE, DUE has to
be greater than DTSTART? Why can't they be equal? Isn't it possible to have
to-do's that start and are due on the same day?


_______________________________________________
ietf-calsify mailing list
ietf-calsify at osafoundation.org
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-calsify