Re: RE: Quick comments on the "sch" and "csct" drafts

[Mark Horton <mark@xxxxxxxxxx>]

In general, I think the vCalendar spec is further advanced and more fleshed out 
than the SCH spec, and I think the result should be based on CSCT.

However, on the issue of time zones, I think SCH has some useful stuff.  I 
suggest that much of the time and time zone text can be borrowed from SCH into 
the target document.

But the basic structure of a single date with several parameters, as used in 
CSCT, seems more compact and useful, especially if you're dealing with several 
dates in the same event.

Perhaps some tweaking, such as moving the time zone names elsewhere (put the 
daylight zone name before the start/stop times, put the standard zone name in 
the TZ line) will permit an arbitrary number of pairs of start/stop dates on 
the DAYLIGHT line.

The other alternative is to enumerate each of the instances of the recurring 
meeting, with the UTC offset for each one specified separately.  That works 
fine for anything except "forever" (which I gather we've given up on) but isn't 
as compact.

	Mark

On Mon, 9 Dec 1996 12:40:36 -0800 Alec Dun <AlecDu@Exchange.Microsoft.com> 
wrote:

> vCalendar only allows one daylight & one standard time shift, which
> means I can effectively only have a recurring meeting that lasts a year.
> We discussed this a lot on the list and the general concensus was that
> multiple timezone shifts are needed so we can schedule a recurring
> meeting that lasts more than a year.