Subject: [Ietf-calsify] Jumping back into the fray, with an apology

From: nsb at guppylake.com (Nathaniel Borenstein)
Date: Thu Feb 10 08:28:53 2005

I must begin with an apology:  I had fallen way behind on the 
calendaring discussions due to a combination of new work 
responsibilities, family crises, and the usual email overload.  
However,  I have actually managed to catch up on the discussions, and 
have a few comments to throw in; I apologize for their tardiness.

My comments center around the notion of *simplifying* ical.  I am not 
yet convinced that we are being radical enough for this effort to 
succeed.  I have comments on 3 general topics that have come up in the 
last few months of discussion, which I am separating into 3 different 
messages, to make any subsequent discussion easier to follow.  My next 
three messages will discuss the following topics:

	-- Receiver Capability Description Considered Harmful
	-- The ical version number must be bumped
	-- What's wrong with more radical simplification?

Finally, after all of this belated and opinionated ranting, you will no 
doubt be happy to hear that I have no opinion whatsoever on the XML 
question.  I firmly believe that if we ever get the semantics right, 
either syntax will be fine.  -- Nathaniel