Re: SKI Presentation in Oslo

[John Stracke <francis@xxxxxxxx>]

Frank_Dawson@lotus.com wrote:

> If the latter, then we probably want to look at modifying the RFC2426
> restriction tables for VEVENT, rather than a new component. Can we get
> by with keeping these as VEVENTs that have a DTSTART/DTEND, but a
> special priority and category for these "unscheduled events".

This makes me uneasy.  Remember that whatever you come up with needs to
have a reasonable chance of being able to fit into existing calendar
software's data models (otherwise everybody has to modify their existing
databases, which gets expensive).  I don't really see any way a calendar
that represents events as happening at particular times can be used to
store something unscheduled.

On the other hand, I don't have a good grasp on how SKI presents these
unscheduled events, either.  I understand what they're *for*, but I
can't really envision what the UI would look like.  Maybe that would
give me some ideas.

--
/=============================================================\
|John Stracke    | My opinions are my own | S/MIME & HTML OK  |
|francis@ecal.com|============================================|
|Chief Scientist | NT's lack of reliability is only surpassed |
|eCal Corp.      |  by its lack of scalability. -- John Kirch |
\=============================================================/