Re: Cool Features - Was: (Re: Examples Are Somewhat Confusing)

["Peter O'Leary" <poleary@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Alec Dun wrote:
> 
> Peter,
> 
> This is just one of the issues I originally raised.  Concensus involves
> getting all involved parties to air their issues and then work thru them
> (which is what we are doing).  Also, different issues are important to
> different people.
> 
> Thanks,
> Alec.
> 

Folks,

I'm all for raising the issues and reaching consenus by working through
them. My point is simply that if the issue being discussed is outside of
the scope of Calendaring and Scheduling, in the opinion of the group,
then it is appropriate to table it until other more pressing issues are
resolved.

I personally believe that the issue of whether or not properties should
be typed, while it may be an important question, does not need to be
resolved for the purpose of Calendaring and Scheduling operations.

An example of an issue that I believe *does* need to be resolved,

The Application/Properties Appointment profile defines "Start" and "End"
using RFC822's date format, vCalendar defines "DTSTART" and "DTEND"
using ISO8601. How close are we to resolving that issue?

Pete.