Subject: [Ietf-calsify] RDATE, EXDATE value types

From: cyrus at daboo.name (Cyrus Daboo)
Date: Mon Oct 1 14:16:56 2007

Hi,
Is the following legal:

DTSTART;TZID=America/Tijuana:20050801T090000
EXDATE:20050801T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/Tijuana:20050801T100000

i.e. is it allowed to have an EXDATE (or RDATE for that matter) that is 
floating when the DTSTART is not floating (or vice versa)? Seems to me that 
should not be allowed.

i.e.:

if DTSTART is UTC or local time, then EXDATE/RDATE MUST also be UTC or 
localtime.
if DTSTART is floating time, then EXDATE/RDATE MUST also be floating time.

I couldn't find any text that explicitly spelled that out in 2445bis.

-- 
Cyrus Daboo

---

From: jeffrey at osafoundation.org (Jeffrey Harris)
Date: Mon Oct 1 14:19:39 2007

I don't think this is specifically illegal, and I've squashed too many
bugs involving mismatched DTSTART/EXDATEs.  It'd be really lovely if we
could add this as a requirement.

Sincerely,
Jeffrey

---

From: bernard.desruisseaux at oracle.com (Bernard Desruisseaux)
Date: Mon Oct 1 20:44:24 2007

Cyrus,

I'm not aware of any restriction that would make this illegal.

I see two options here:

1- Add restrictions similar to the ones we've added for the UNTIL rule
    part.  Something like:

    The value of the EXDATE property MUST have the same value type as
    the "DTSTART" property.  Furthermore, if the "DTSTART" property is
    specified as a date with local time, then the EXDATE property MUST
    also be specified as a date with local time. Else, if the "DTSTART"
    property is specified as a date with UTC time or a date with local
    time and time zone reference, then the EXDATE MUST be specified as
    either a date with UTC time or a date with local time and time zone
    reference.

2- Clarify that an EXDATE property specified as a date with local time
    does not exclude any recurrence instance when DTSTART is specified
    as a date with UTC time or as a date with local time and time zone
    reference. And the other way around... An EXDATE property specified
    as a date with UTC or a date with local time and time zone reference
    does not exclude any recurrence instance when DTSTART is specified
    as a date with local time.

BTW, we should also consider the case of RECURRENCE-ID.

Cheers,
Bernard

Cyrus Daboo wrote:
> floating when the DTSTART is not floating (or vice versa)? Seems to me 
> that should not be allowed.
> 
> i.e.:
>

---

From: lear at cisco.com (Eliot Lear)
Date: Tue Oct 2 07:06:39 2007

Chair hat on.

Unless we hear clear consensus that this will improve interoperability,
the RFC2445bis is closed except for modifications necessary to
accommodate changes to RFC2446bis.

Eliot

Bernard Desruisseaux wrote:
>> i.e. is it allowed to have an EXDATE (or RDATE for that matter) that
>> is floating when the DTSTART is not floating (or vice versa)? Seems
>> to me that should not be allowed.
>>
>> i.e.:
>>
>> if DTSTART is UTC or local time, then EXDATE/RDATE MUST also be UTC
>> or localtime.
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-calsify mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-calsify
>