Subject: [Ietf-calsify] Re: Google Speculation, but interesting

From: camerost at exchange.microsoft.com (Cameron Stillion)
Date: Sat Feb 26 23:18:17 2005

The behavior I have seen in the latest Apple iCal (the product) with
regard to timezones is that they are NOT defined in VTIMEZONE blocks,
but are named in VEVENTS.  The names seem to match the OSX naming
comventions for Time Zones, and notably do not match the Windows names.
Since they aren't formally defined, it's difficult to map them.  We are
forced to have an internal list of Apple names for the sole purpose of
interoping.  (grumble grumble)

Cameron

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
[email-masked]
Sent: Saturday.26.February.2005 14.56
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Calsify; [email-masked];
[email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Ietf-calsify] Re: Google Speculation, but interesting

Even more intriguing.  This may actually be good news.  Cool...
___________________
Patricia Egen Consulting
www.egenconsulting.com
423-875-2652

[email-masked]
02/25/2005 06:02 PM

To
[email-masked]
cc
Calsify <[email-masked]>,
[email-masked], [email-masked] Subject
Re: [Ietf-calsify] Re:  Google Speculation, but interesting

I would like to apologize. What I had received from apple is limited and

did not have any features introduced by iCalendar.  Timezone the way 
iCalendar uses them was introduced by iCalendar.  VCalendar just had an 
offset which was found to be insufficient. 

[email-masked] 
Sent by: [email-masked] 
02/25/2005 05:36 PM 

To
[email-masked] 
cc
Calsify <[email-masked]>, 
[email-masked], [email-masked] 
Subject
Re: [Ietf-calsify] Re:  Google Speculation, but interesting

Robert, I've been getting some private emails that say it's based on 
iCalendar.  So, now I'm intrigued.  iCalendar is also based on vCalendar

as well.  I'd really love to see them participate on interops so we
could 
see, first hand, what actually does or does not work.

[email-masked] 
02/24/2005 07:35 PM

To
[email-masked]
cc
Calsify <[email-masked]>, 
[email-masked], Tim Hare <[email-masked]>, 
[email-masked]
Subject
Re: [Ietf-calsify] Re:  Google Speculation, but interesting

Actually original was not iCalendar at all.  It  vCalendar 1.0 September

18, 1996 which seems to be what apple uses. 

[email-masked] 
Sent by: [email-masked] 
02/24/2005 07:21 PM 

To
Tim Hare <[email-masked]> 
cc
Calsify <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], 
[email-masked] 
Subject
Re: [Ietf-calsify] Re:  Google Speculation, but interesting

I think the item on the Blog is about iCal - which is the Apple
standard. 
The apple standard is based on the original work but it's not iCalendar.
___________________
Patricia Egen Consulting
www.egenconsulting.com
423-875-2652

Tim Hare <[email-masked]> 
Sent by: [email-masked]
02/24/2005 04:51 PM

To
Calsify <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
cc

Subject
[Ietf-calsify] Re:  Google Speculation, but interesting

This is interesting... some months ago (3-4?) I sent in a suggestion to 
Google that they develop a specialized search for calendar information, 
and 
I specifically suggested that they had such clout that they could boost 
calendar standardization and iCalendar. Maybe one of their software 
engineers got interested on his/her own.  In any event, Google's
interest 
in calendar can only help propel things along.

Cross posted to ietf-calsify and rdf-calendar because I got two separate

posts about this on the same day.

Tim Hare
Interested Bystander, Non-Inc. 

_______________________________________________
Ietf-calsify mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-calsify

_______________________________________________
Ietf-calsify mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-calsify

_______________________________________________
Ietf-calsify mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-calsify

_______________________________________________
Ietf-calsify mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-calsify

---

From: daboo at isamet.com (Cyrus Daboo)
Date: Sun Feb 27 06:37:17 2005

Hi Cameron,

> interoping.  (grumble grumble)

Right - I just did a test and indeed if you create a new calendar and add a 
single event with a timezone, it does not include the VTIMEZONE in the ics 
file it creates in its own calendar store. However, if you 'Export' the 
calendar from the iCal.app, then it does include a VTIMEZONE. The VTIMEZONE 
appears to be correct, but contains only the minimum amount of information 
to cover the time for the event. Arguably this is not a bug as it is free 
to do whatever it wants in its own calendar store.

WRT naming of timezones on different OS's - hopefully with a standardised 
timezone registry we can solve that issue and also remove the need to 
always send the VTIMEZONE data by value (as opposed to by reference to the 
registry entry).

-- 
Cyrus Daboo

---

From: Libby.Miller at bristol.ac.uk (Libby Miller)
Date: Sun Feb 27 06:48:11 2005

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005, Cyrus Daboo wrote:

> appears to be correct, but contains only the minimum amount of information to 
> cover the time for the event. Arguably this is not a bug as it is free to do 
> whatever it wants in its own calendar store.
>
> timezone registry we can solve that issue and also remove the need to always 
> send the VTIMEZONE data by value (as opposed to by reference to the registry 
> entry).

Is it worth using the iCalendar urls for timezones on the W3C site 
as a registry like that?[1] W3C has a policy for url longevity[2]. At 
the moment the timezones are maintained as RDF, but that's a 
transliteration of iCalendar into XML/RDF and could perhaps in any case 
have iCalendar versions added. The urls for timezones are part of 
experiments in turning icalendar into RDF[3].

Libby

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/tzd/
[2] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Persistence
[3] http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/

---

From: daboo at isamet.com (Cyrus Daboo)
Date: Sun Feb 27 07:14:56 2005

Hi Libby,

--On February 27, 2005 2:47:47 PM +0000 Libby Miller 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>> WRT naming of timezones on different OS's - hopefully with a
>> standardised  timezone registry we can solve that issue and also remove
>> the need to always  send the VTIMEZONE data by value (as opposed to by
>> reference to the registry  entry).
>
> Is it worth using the iCalendar urls for timezones on the W3C site as a
> registry like that?[1] W3C has a policy for url longevity[2]. At the
> moment the timezones are maintained as RDF, but that's a transliteration
> of iCalendar into XML/RDF and could perhaps in any case have iCalendar
> versions added. The urls for timezones are part of experiments in turning
> icalendar into RDF[3].

<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-royer-timezone-registry-01.txt> 
contains a proposal for setting up an IANA registry for iCalendar format 
timezone data. It would probably make sense to have just one 'primary' 
registry for both iCal and RDF versions. Other places could mirror those as 
appropriate. In fact I plan on having our CalDAV server sync to the 
registry at regular intervals and then clients accessing the server could 
sync (or do initial 'provisioning') via the server rather than having to 
have explicit knowledge of the registry.

-- 
Cyrus Daboo

---

From: Doug at Royer.com (Doug Royer)
Date: Sun Feb 27 11:45:42 2005

Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 4696 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/ietf-calsify/attachments/20050227/3d38f0a7/smime.bin