RE: SKICal CONTROL

[Bruce_Kahn@xxxxxxxx]

Shannon asked:
>How should "ORGANIZER" be handled for the possibly large number of events
>for which it hold no meaning? Examples: Holidays; public events; tax-filing
>deadlines; etc.
>
>In the context of events, such as holidays, shared by all the users of a
>given calendar system (probably by way of user groups and a group
>calendar) - the concept of ORGANIZER and for that matter ATTENDEE are
>counterproductive and likely confusing if displayed or revealed to an end
>user.

For all the examples above there are definite uses for an Organizer.  The Organizer is the one who is responsible for organizing the Holidays, public events, etc.  Whom is this you may be thinking.  Simple, whom ever defines it and then publishes it.  Who says that in the US, "April 15th (or the closest following weekday if on a weekend) is when final tax payments are due?".  The US goverment (or if you prefer, the IRS).  Who would be responsible for organizing local public events like St. Patricks Day Parades, Concerts on the Town Common, etc?  The local government of course.

If one of the entities is going to publish some kind of event schedule or timetable then there has to be some Organizer to disseminate and possibly update that information.

Nearly all of the examples Shannon asked about are the PUBLISH type.  That is, the IRS does not care to get a COUNTER from me when it tells me I have taxes due on 15-Apr-01.  Nor does it want a COUNTER proposal for how much (or when) I should pay.  In iTIP, PUBLISHes are done w/o ATTENDEEs so there should be no confusion.

One could see some cases where REQUEST is used instead of PUBLISH.  For example, the local government wants to get an idea of how may folks plan to attend the local free concerts on the common so they can judge how much police or emergency services to have on hand.  I doubt they would want DELEGATION or COUNTER messages from individuals but they may want to get a feel for attendance.  As such, ATTENDEE is not really counterproductive or confusing; it may be a single address like "mailto:westford-residents@xxxxxxxxxxxx" and NOT likely the entire taxpayer list for Westford...

However this kind of case is not likely to be as predominant as the PUBLISH case.

Bruce
===========================================================================
Bruce Kahn                                INet: Bruce_Kahn@xxxxxxxx
Iris Associates                          Phone: 978.392.5335
Westford, MA, USA 01886                    FAX: and nothing but the FAX...
Standard disclaimers apply, even where prohibited by law...