Subject: [Ietf-calsify] Issue 54: Remove FREQ=SECONDLY, MINUTELY and BYSECOND/BYMINUTE

From: lear at cisco.com (Eliot Lear)
Date: Thu Feb 8 07:22:41 2007

The jabber discussion came to consensus that we should not remove the 
above, but instead that an implementation guide should be written on 
downgrades.  Are there objections?

Eliot

---

From: andrew_dowden at softdesign.net.nz (Andrew N Dowden)
Date: Thu Feb 8 20:15:46 2007

> downgrades.  Are there objections?
thank you ..

The consensus now supports my original comment:  labelled implementation
guidelines  instead of removal of features.

Who is leading / pushing this element?

-- 
_______________________________________________

  SoftDesign Group
  Dowden Software Associates
  P O Box 31 132, Lower Hutt 5040, NEW ZEALAND

---

From: TimHare at comcast.net (Tim Hare)
Date: Fri Feb 9 06:04:11 2007

Thoughts: 

1. "Doc, it hurts when I do this!" "Don't do that."   -- I am not going to
argue the consensus of the group on what to leave in or out, but guidelines
documents don't have the same impact in the marketplace. People purchasing
products care if it says "complies to such-and-such an RFC, therefore
interoperates with other vendors", they aren't much impressed by a statement
that says "tries to follow the guidelines as well as it can". Should the
guidelines be yet another RFC for Calendar Interoperability? 

2. Perhaps CalConnect can help with an implementation guideline, with
reports on what interoperates well now, and what doesn't?

3. I'd like to see the RFC finished before writing guidelines - otherwise
we'd be aiming at a (hopefully by now slowly) moving target.

4. I won't have time until March, and since I participate here on my own
time, will not probably be funding my own travel for meetings on this, but I
would help try to write interoperability guidelines - despite #1 above, if
this is what has to be done, then I might be able to help.

Tim Hare
Interested Bystander, Non-Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Andrew N Dowden
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 11:15 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Ietf-calsify] Issue 54: Remove FREQ=SECONDLY,MINUTELY and
BYSECOND/BYMINUTE

thank you ..

  SoftDesign Group
  Dowden Software Associates
  P O Box 31 132, Lower Hutt 5040, NEW ZEALAND
_______________________________________________
Ietf-calsify mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-calsify

---

From: lear at cisco.com (Eliot Lear)
Date: Fri Feb 9 07:42:27 2007

Tim,

There seemed to be general agreement on the jabber that at *some* point 
RFC 3283 should be reviewed, but I don't think the chairs would 
entertain that notion until we're done with the work already on our 
plate.  While I can sympathize with people wanting to simplify, the fact 
is that this group has not been able to resolve the issue that there are 
a divergent lot using the standards in question, and some really want 
that rich capability on their beefy 2Ghz 3Gig systems while others pay 
hefty premiums for each kilobyte used.  I can respect both positions, 
and so we are going to need a way to distinguish the two groups, going 
forward.  I do not see that being RFC2445bis.

Eliot