[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
itip-05.txt and FREEBUSY
- To: ietf-calendar@xxxxxxx
- Subject: itip-05.txt and FREEBUSY
- From: Richard Hirst <Richard.Hirst@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 3 Jul 98 12:28:44 +0100
- Original-encoded-information-types: IA5-Text, (2)(6)(1)(12)(0), (1)(2)(840)(113556)(3)(10)(1)
- Sender: owner-ietf-calendar@xxxxxxx
- X400-content-identifier: itip-05.txt and
- X400-content-type: P2-1988 (22)
- X400-mts-identifier: ["/PRMD=NET-TEL/ADMD=Gold 400/C=GB/";ORANGE:00c5-980703122844-00e5]
- X400-originator: Richard.Hirst@net-tel.co.uk
- X400-received: by mta "ice" in "/PRMD=net-tel/ADMD=gold 400/C=gb/"; Relayed; Fri, 3 Jul 98 12:32:06 +0100
- X400-received: by mta "net-tel" in "/PRMD=net-tel/ADMD=gold 400/C=gb/"; Relayed; Fri, 3 Jul 98 12:28:44 +0100
- X400-received: by "/PRMD=NET-TEL/ADMD=Gold 400/C=GB/"; Relayed; Fri, 3 Jul 98 12:28:44 +0100
- X400-recipients: email@example.com
I have been studying section 3.3, Methods For VFREEBUSY Components, and have a couple of comments/questions:
In 3.3.1, PUBLISH, the text says '"ATTENDEE" propertry must be specified', but the property constraints table specifies ORGANIZER=1 and ATTENDEE=0. Which is correct?
In 3.3.2, REQUEST, the text says 'The request _may_ be for a busy time information bounded by a specific time interval', but the table specifies DTSTART=1, DTEND=1 implying these fields are required. Is an unbounded request allowed?
In 3.3.3, REPLY, it states that the values in FREEBUSY MAY NOT overlap. Para. 4 of 3.3 says 'busy time periods MAY overlap'.
Is the intention that you can PUBLISH overlapping values, but must REPLY with non-overlapping values?
3.3 says applications must only publish busy time, and infer free time. Can FBTYPE=BUSY-UNAVAILABLE/BUSY/BUSY-TENTATIVE still be used, or is it always taken as a plain BUSY?