[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Hi all,

how do you people expect CAP to change the way VTIMEZONE are
handled according to previous standards?

Section 4.2.19 of [iCalendar]:

The value of the TZID property
   parameter will be equal to the value of the TZID property for the
   matching time zone definition. An individual "VTIMEZONE" calendar
   component MUST be specified for each unique "TZID" parameter value
   specified in the iCalendar object.

and section 3.1 of [iTIP]:

DateTime values MAY refer to a "VTIMEZONE" component. The property
   restrictions in the table below apply to any "VTIMEZONE" component in
   an ITIP message.

   Component/Property  Presence
   ------------------- ----------------------------------------------
   VTIMEZONE           0+      MUST be present if any date/time refers
                               to timezone

For BOOKED components, iTIP is irrelevant, but when storing or
retrieving iTIP components I would expect 3.1 of iTIP to be
mandatory. So we need to always include the VTIMEZONEs the component(s)

This seems to be a little bit absurd to me: the CUA only needs to
be able to retrieve the VTIMEZONEs from the CS; it can do so once
per session (and even cache them between sessions).
I propose we amend 3.1 and interpret 4.2.19 to mean all the VTIMEZONEs
must exist in the CAP store. To accomodate simple-minded CUAs, they
MAY appear in iTIP objects exchanged between the parties.

What do you think?


Andrea Campi                              mailto:a.campi@xxxxxxx
I.NET S.p.A. - BT Ignite                  http://www.inet.it
Technical Dept. - R&D			  phone: +39 02 32863 ext 1
v. Darwin, 85 - I-20019			  fax: +39 02 32863 ext 7705
Settimo Milanese (MI), Italy