Re: RE[2]: MIME as a vCalendar element separator - bad move...

[Ken Shan <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Alec Dun wrote:

> How many people are intending to build calendaring products that will
> not be capable of sending meeting requests to others via e-mail?

We are.  On the sending side we plan to have Web-downloadable event
schedules (in particular courses); on the receiving side the user
either drags these to their own calendaring application or uses a Java
applet.  For simple unidirectional exchanges like these we don't
really need MIME.

I cannot understand why the issue of code bloat is being exaggerated
so much, or maybe I just don't understand the issue.  From what I
understand, we're trying to decide whether we should put BEGIN/END
around calendar objects.  I assume that even if we do have BEGIN/END,
we'd still want to encapsulate the whole thing inside a MIME part.  If
each part is limited to one calendar object, it takes one line of code
to skip BEGIN/END "pseudo-properties" if one doesn't want to see them.
If each part can consist of multiple calendar objects, it takes maybe
ten lines to simulate a new (recursive) MIME part for each BEGIN if
one would prefer to see it that way.  Or did I miss something?

-- 
blue | Ken; Shan, Chung-chieh; Sian7, Tiong1-kiat8; ken@digitas.harvard.edu.
 ()  | Your code today becomes the mind tomorrow:  Your plan its means,
 /\  | your dream its ends, your ideal its elegance.  Hack on.