[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: MIME Multiple body parts (Was Re: uid...)
This does explain something - I have spent the least time looking over iTIP
so I had missed that section - but it is a clear indication of the different
viewpoints on what use is intended for iCalendar objects.
Simple and VERY common use case I have a question about:
Calendar User Agent connects to Calendar Store for the FIRST TIME.
Use case is - How does the CUA obtain the full calendar for that USER from
the Calendar store?
"multiple sends" - seems like a very ugly solution.
I believe this is an EXACT use case from our documents - it is implied that
Calendar User Agents will maintain a LOCAL Calendar Store - to me at least
this implies a means to obtain the FULL calendar for that user from the
remote store to a local store.
From: Steve Mansour [mailto:sman@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 5:45 PM
To: Shannon J. Clark
Cc: John Stracke; ietf-calendar@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: MIME Multiple body parts (Was Re: uid...)
"Shannon J. Clark" wrote:
> There is a common trend to associate ONE MIME object holding an iCalendar
> object with ONE vEVENT (and perhaps a vTimezone object). In fact I think
> some vendors may ONLY deal with iCalendar objects that contain only one
> However it is clearly valid to have a vCalendar with multiple vEVENT
> (or else what are we doing here???)
you'd think it would be clearly valid wouldnt you? Actually, there was
a very persuasive group of folks that wanted text/calendar mime parts to
only contain components with a single UID. And they won :-) Have a
look at the restriction tables in iTIP. For VEVENTs, where the presence
value is 1+, the text specifies that all components must have the same
> How would you encode a iCalendar object holding multiple vEVENTS that were
> in DIFFERENT languages (and required DIFFERENT character encodings - say a
> calendar with meetings in Tokyo and Singapore - requiring Japanese and
> Chinese character encodings...)?
While I am not a fan of limiting the iCalendar objects in iTIP to a
specific UID, it does seem to mitigate this problem. I think it would
be very unlikely to have a recurring event where different instances of
the same event have different character encodings.
> In general how are "full calendar" objects intended to be handled - much
> the standards we are writing seem to treat individual events as the
> unit for work - associating with them perhaps a vTimezone object, but
> objects such as vTODO or even multiple vEVENT objects seem to be perhaps
> more complex to deal with?
iTIP doesn't handle this. CAP probably should. Any suggestions? Worst
case, we require multiple sends.